Background: Chronic kidney disease patients are at a greater risk for nephropathy requiring dialysis after percutaneous coronary intervention. Such patients are usually deferred due to fear of “Renalism”.?Objectives...Background: Chronic kidney disease patients are at a greater risk for nephropathy requiring dialysis after percutaneous coronary intervention. Such patients are usually deferred due to fear of “Renalism”.?Objectives This study assesses the outcome of Low dose contrast protocol during PCI in CKD patients whose e-GFR 60 ml/min/1.72 m and investigates a safety margin for contrast use in these high-risk categories.?Methods: Patients were into three groups according to CV/e-GFR ratio: Group (A) low-dose: CV/e-GFR ratio 2.0 Group (B) medium-dose: CV/e-GFR ratio > 2.0 and × bodyweight\s.creatinine). Group (C) high-dose: CV/e-GFR ratio > MACD. Results: A total of 73 patients were enrolled. Average age was 54 ± 8 years,81.4% were male and 18.6% were females and 52% were diabetic. Mean baseline e-GFR was 40 ± 8.0 ml/min/1.73m2. Contrast Volume used in group A was (58.26 ± 15.05) (n = 24), in group B (109.42 ± 17.11) (n = 26) and in group C (304.5 ± 60.30) (n = 23), respectively. The incidences of CI-AKI in the 3 groups were 0%, 11.5% and 35%, respectively (p = 0.02). All-cause death 0%, 17% and introduction of maintenance hemo dialysis was 0%, 11.5% and 26%, respectively (p Conclusion: Low dose contrast protocol is safe, effective and easily applicable technique without CI-AKI or death.展开更多
文摘Background: Chronic kidney disease patients are at a greater risk for nephropathy requiring dialysis after percutaneous coronary intervention. Such patients are usually deferred due to fear of “Renalism”.?Objectives This study assesses the outcome of Low dose contrast protocol during PCI in CKD patients whose e-GFR 60 ml/min/1.72 m and investigates a safety margin for contrast use in these high-risk categories.?Methods: Patients were into three groups according to CV/e-GFR ratio: Group (A) low-dose: CV/e-GFR ratio 2.0 Group (B) medium-dose: CV/e-GFR ratio > 2.0 and × bodyweight\s.creatinine). Group (C) high-dose: CV/e-GFR ratio > MACD. Results: A total of 73 patients were enrolled. Average age was 54 ± 8 years,81.4% were male and 18.6% were females and 52% were diabetic. Mean baseline e-GFR was 40 ± 8.0 ml/min/1.73m2. Contrast Volume used in group A was (58.26 ± 15.05) (n = 24), in group B (109.42 ± 17.11) (n = 26) and in group C (304.5 ± 60.30) (n = 23), respectively. The incidences of CI-AKI in the 3 groups were 0%, 11.5% and 35%, respectively (p = 0.02). All-cause death 0%, 17% and introduction of maintenance hemo dialysis was 0%, 11.5% and 26%, respectively (p Conclusion: Low dose contrast protocol is safe, effective and easily applicable technique without CI-AKI or death.
文摘具有混合记忆的自步对比学习(Self-paced Contrastive Learning,SpCL)通过集群聚类生成不同级别的伪标签来训练网络,取得了较好的识别效果,然而该方法从源域和目标域中捕获的行人数据之间存在典型的分布差异,使得训练出的网络不能准确区别目标域和源域数据域特征。针对此问题,提出了双分支动态辅助对比学习(Dynamic Auxiliary Contrastive Learning,DACL)框架。该方法首先通过动态减小源域和目标域之间的局部最大平均差异(Local Maximum Mean Discrepancy,LMMD),以有效地学习目标域的域不变特征;其次,引入广义均值(Generalized Mean,GeM)池化策略,在特征提取后再进行特征聚合,使提出的网络能够自适应地聚合图像的重要特征;最后,在3个经典行人重识别数据集上进行了仿真实验,提出的DACL与性能次之的无监督域自适应行人重识别方法相比,mAP和rank-1在Market1501数据集上分别增加了6.0个百分点和2.2个百分点,在MSMT17数据集上分别增加了2.8个百分点和3.6个百分点,在Duke数据集上分别增加了1.7个百分点和2.1个百分点。
