AIM: To investigate the safety and efficacy of intravitreal dexamethasone implants(Ozurdex?/DEX) in patients with diabetic macular edema(DME) either na?ve or nonna?ve to anti-VEGF therapies who switched to DEX implant...AIM: To investigate the safety and efficacy of intravitreal dexamethasone implants(Ozurdex?/DEX) in patients with diabetic macular edema(DME) either na?ve or nonna?ve to anti-VEGF therapies who switched to DEX implant independent of response to anti-vascular endothelial growth factors(anti-VEGFs).METHODS: This was an audit retrospective review of medical records of patients with DME who switched to the DEX intravitreal implant. Patients were divided into 2 groups: patients na?ve to antiangiogenic therapy and patients who were previously treated with anti-VEGFs. Data regarding demographics, changes in mean best-corrected visual acuity(BCVA), central macular thickness(CMT), and intraocular pressure(IOP) was collected over 6 mo. The demographic data mean changes in BCVA, CMT, and IOP were compared. Six-month follow-up data of 47 patients(57 eyes), who either switched to DEX implant irrespective of response to previous treatments or were treatment na?ve before receiving DEX implant, was collected.RESULTS: Improvement in mean BCVA was observed from 1-4 mo after injection with a decreased effect at month 6 as expected, with better outcomes in na?ve compared to non-na?ve patients. A statistically relevant decrease in mean CMT was observed during the follow-up period. An increase in mean IOP was observed in the first 2 mo after DEX therapy. The mean number of injections of the overall population during the 6 mo was 1.3. A subgroup analysis showed no relevant difference between phakic versus pseudophakic patients relative to measured outcomes. There was no cataract progression during the follow-up period and no adverse events reported.CONCLUSION: This real-life setting study shows that intravitreal DEX implant is effective and safe. The timings of greater therapeutic impact are concordant with previous studies and suggest that earlier treatment with corticosteroids may have an additional benefit in na?ve patients.展开更多
BACKGROUND: Urgent airway management is one of the most important responsibilities of otolaryngologists, often requiring a multidisciplinary approach. Urgent surgical airway intervention is indicated when an acute air...BACKGROUND: Urgent airway management is one of the most important responsibilities of otolaryngologists, often requiring a multidisciplinary approach. Urgent surgical airway intervention is indicated when an acute airway obstruction occurs or there are intubation difficulties. In these situations, surgical tracheostomy becomes extremely important.METHODS: We retrospectively studied the patients who underwent surgical tracheostomy from 2011 to 2014 by an otolaryngologist team at the operating theater of the emergency department of a tertiary hospital. Indications, complications and clinical evolution of the patients were reviewed.RESULTS: The study included 56 patients(44 men and 12 women) with a median age of 55 years. The procedure was performed under local anesthesia in 21.4% of the patients. Two(3.6%) patients were subjected to conversion from cricothyrostomy to tracheostomy. Head and neck neoplasm was indicated in 44.6% of the patients, deep neck infection in 19.6%, and bilateral vocal fold paralysis in 10.7%. Stridor was the most frequent signal(51.8%). Of the 56 patients, 15 were transferred to another hospital. Among the other 41 patients, 21 were decannulated(average time: 4 months), and none of them were cancer patients. Complications occurred in 5(12.2%) patients: hemorrhage in 3, surgical wound infection in 1, and cervico-thoracic subcutaneous emphysema in 1. No death was related to the procedure.CONCLUSION: Urgent tracheostomy is a life-saving procedure for patients with acute airway obstruction or with diffi cult intubation. It is a safe and effective procedure, with a low complication rate, and should be performed before the patient's clinical status turns into a surgical emergency situation.展开更多
文摘AIM: To investigate the safety and efficacy of intravitreal dexamethasone implants(Ozurdex?/DEX) in patients with diabetic macular edema(DME) either na?ve or nonna?ve to anti-VEGF therapies who switched to DEX implant independent of response to anti-vascular endothelial growth factors(anti-VEGFs).METHODS: This was an audit retrospective review of medical records of patients with DME who switched to the DEX intravitreal implant. Patients were divided into 2 groups: patients na?ve to antiangiogenic therapy and patients who were previously treated with anti-VEGFs. Data regarding demographics, changes in mean best-corrected visual acuity(BCVA), central macular thickness(CMT), and intraocular pressure(IOP) was collected over 6 mo. The demographic data mean changes in BCVA, CMT, and IOP were compared. Six-month follow-up data of 47 patients(57 eyes), who either switched to DEX implant irrespective of response to previous treatments or were treatment na?ve before receiving DEX implant, was collected.RESULTS: Improvement in mean BCVA was observed from 1-4 mo after injection with a decreased effect at month 6 as expected, with better outcomes in na?ve compared to non-na?ve patients. A statistically relevant decrease in mean CMT was observed during the follow-up period. An increase in mean IOP was observed in the first 2 mo after DEX therapy. The mean number of injections of the overall population during the 6 mo was 1.3. A subgroup analysis showed no relevant difference between phakic versus pseudophakic patients relative to measured outcomes. There was no cataract progression during the follow-up period and no adverse events reported.CONCLUSION: This real-life setting study shows that intravitreal DEX implant is effective and safe. The timings of greater therapeutic impact are concordant with previous studies and suggest that earlier treatment with corticosteroids may have an additional benefit in na?ve patients.
文摘BACKGROUND: Urgent airway management is one of the most important responsibilities of otolaryngologists, often requiring a multidisciplinary approach. Urgent surgical airway intervention is indicated when an acute airway obstruction occurs or there are intubation difficulties. In these situations, surgical tracheostomy becomes extremely important.METHODS: We retrospectively studied the patients who underwent surgical tracheostomy from 2011 to 2014 by an otolaryngologist team at the operating theater of the emergency department of a tertiary hospital. Indications, complications and clinical evolution of the patients were reviewed.RESULTS: The study included 56 patients(44 men and 12 women) with a median age of 55 years. The procedure was performed under local anesthesia in 21.4% of the patients. Two(3.6%) patients were subjected to conversion from cricothyrostomy to tracheostomy. Head and neck neoplasm was indicated in 44.6% of the patients, deep neck infection in 19.6%, and bilateral vocal fold paralysis in 10.7%. Stridor was the most frequent signal(51.8%). Of the 56 patients, 15 were transferred to another hospital. Among the other 41 patients, 21 were decannulated(average time: 4 months), and none of them were cancer patients. Complications occurred in 5(12.2%) patients: hemorrhage in 3, surgical wound infection in 1, and cervico-thoracic subcutaneous emphysema in 1. No death was related to the procedure.CONCLUSION: Urgent tracheostomy is a life-saving procedure for patients with acute airway obstruction or with diffi cult intubation. It is a safe and effective procedure, with a low complication rate, and should be performed before the patient's clinical status turns into a surgical emergency situation.
