The Experts below are selected from a list of 189 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Yunseok Jeon - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
does remote ischaemic preconditioning with postconditioning improve clinical outcomes of patients undergoing cardiac surgery remote ischaemic preconditioning with postconditioning outcome trial
European Heart Journal, 2014Co-Authors: Deok Man Hong, Ji Hyun Chin, Daekee Choi, Jaehyon Bahk, In Cheol Choi, Yunseok JeonAbstract:Aims The aim of this study was to evaluate whether remote ischaemic preconditioning (RIPC) combined with remote ischaemic postconditioning (RIPostC) improves the clinical outcomes of patients undergoing cardiac surgery. Methods and results From June 2009 to November 2010, 1280 patients who underwent elective cardiac surgery were randomized into the RIPC with RIPostC group or the control group in the morning of the surgery. In the RIPC with RIPostC group, four cycles of 5-min ischaemia and 5-min reperfusion were administered twice to the upper limb—before cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) or coronary anastomoses for RIPC and after CPB or coronary anastomoses for RIPostC. The primary endpoint was the composite of major adverse outcomes, including death, myocardial infarction, arrhythmia, stroke, coma, renal failure or dysfunction, respiratory failure, cardiogenic shock, Gastrointestinal Complication, and multiorgan failure. Remote ischaemic preconditioning with RIPostC did not reduce the composite outcome compared with the control group (38.0 vs . 38.1%, respectively; P = 0.998) and there was no difference in each major adverse outcome. The intensive care unit and hospital stays were not different between the two groups. However, in the off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery subgroup, multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that RIPC with RIPostC was related to increased composite outcome (odds ratio: 1.54; 95% confidence interval: 1.02–2.30; P = 0.038). Conclusion Remote ischaemic preconditioning with RIPostC by transient upper limb ischaemia did not improve clinical outcome in patients who underwent cardiac surgery. Clinical Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov, [NCT00997217][1]. [1]: /lookup/external-ref?link_type=CLINTRIALGOV&access_num=NCT00997217&atom=%2Fehj%2Fearly%2F2013%2F09%2F07%2Feurheartj.eht346.atom
Jin Il Kim - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Gastrointestinal Complication in transplant patients
Clinical Endoscopy, 2010Co-Authors: Gun Min Kim, Dae Young Cheung, Jin Il KimAbstract:M.D., Ph.D.Department of Internal Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea College of Medicine, Seoul, KoreaThe Gastrointestinal tract is one of the major sites for Complications after solid organ and hematopoietic stem cell transplantati on, and gastrointestin al Complications are the principle cause of morbidity and death. The major Gastrointestinal com-plications after transplantation include mucositis, typhlitis, infectious enterocolitis by virus, bacteria or fungus, pseudomembranous colitis, gastric ulcer, graft- versus-host disease, pneumatosis cystoides intestinalis, thrombotic microangiopa-thy and post-transplantation lymphoproliferative disease. Symptoms and signs of Gastrointestinal Complications following transplantation are often non-specific and present with varying severity. Moreover, the suppressed immune state often pro-hibits invasive studies including endoscopy and blurs the serologic and he-matologic results. Therefore, it is hard to reach accurate diagnoses even after thorough investigations. Almost all immunosuppressive drugs can lead to gastro-intestinal Complications and we need proper strategies to minimize their side effects. On the one hand, we can expect better organ and patient survival through the judicious use of a broad range of immunosuppressive drugs; on the other hand, we should try to not ruin survival through proper precautions and early treatment of Gastrointestinal Complications following successful transplantation.
Deok Man Hong - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
does remote ischaemic preconditioning with postconditioning improve clinical outcomes of patients undergoing cardiac surgery remote ischaemic preconditioning with postconditioning outcome trial
European Heart Journal, 2014Co-Authors: Deok Man Hong, Ji Hyun Chin, Daekee Choi, Jaehyon Bahk, In Cheol Choi, Yunseok JeonAbstract:Aims The aim of this study was to evaluate whether remote ischaemic preconditioning (RIPC) combined with remote ischaemic postconditioning (RIPostC) improves the clinical outcomes of patients undergoing cardiac surgery. Methods and results From June 2009 to November 2010, 1280 patients who underwent elective cardiac surgery were randomized into the RIPC with RIPostC group or the control group in the morning of the surgery. In the RIPC with RIPostC group, four cycles of 5-min ischaemia and 5-min reperfusion were administered twice to the upper limb—before cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) or coronary anastomoses for RIPC and after CPB or coronary anastomoses for RIPostC. The primary endpoint was the composite of major adverse outcomes, including death, myocardial infarction, arrhythmia, stroke, coma, renal failure or dysfunction, respiratory failure, cardiogenic shock, Gastrointestinal Complication, and multiorgan failure. Remote ischaemic preconditioning with RIPostC did not reduce the composite outcome compared with the control group (38.0 vs . 38.1%, respectively; P = 0.998) and there was no difference in each major adverse outcome. The intensive care unit and hospital stays were not different between the two groups. However, in the off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery subgroup, multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that RIPC with RIPostC was related to increased composite outcome (odds ratio: 1.54; 95% confidence interval: 1.02–2.30; P = 0.038). Conclusion Remote ischaemic preconditioning with RIPostC by transient upper limb ischaemia did not improve clinical outcome in patients who underwent cardiac surgery. Clinical Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov, [NCT00997217][1]. [1]: /lookup/external-ref?link_type=CLINTRIALGOV&access_num=NCT00997217&atom=%2Fehj%2Fearly%2F2013%2F09%2F07%2Feurheartj.eht346.atom
Laura Mauri - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the everest ii trial design and rationale for a randomized study of the evalve mitraclip system compared with mitral valve surgery for mitral regurgitation
American Heart Journal, 2010Co-Authors: Laura Mauri, Pallav Garg, Joseph M Massaro, Elyse Foster, Donald D Glower, Paul Mehoudar, Ferolyn T Powell, Jan Komtebedde, Elizabeth McdermottAbstract:Background Mitral valve surgery is the standard of care for patients with symptomatic mitral regurgitation (MR) or asymptomatic MR with evidence of left ventricular dysfunction or dilation. Whether an endovascular approach to repair can offer comparable effectiveness with improved safety remains to be determined in randomized trials. Study Design The EVEREST II Trial is a multicenter, randomized controlled trial to evaluate the benefits and risks of endovascular mitral valve repair using the MitraClip device compared with open mitral valve surgery (control) in patients with moderate or severe MR. Using a 2:1 randomization ratio, the trial is enrolling up to 186 MitraClip-treated subjects and 93 control subjects. Trial end points include a primary efficacy end point: the proportion of patients free from death, surgery for valve dysfunction, and with moderate-severe (3+) or severe (4+) MR at 12 months; the primary safety end point includes the proportion of patients with death, myocardial infarction, reoperation, nonelective cardiovascular surgery, stroke, renal failure, deep would infection, ventilation >48 hours, Gastrointestinal Complication, new permanent atrial fibrillation, septicemia, or transfusion of ≥2 U at 30 days or hospital discharge, whichever is longer. Conclusions This randomized controlled trial is designed to evaluate the performance of endovascular mitral repair in comparison to open mitral valve surgery in patients with significant MR.
Percy Boateng - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
colonic diverticulitis following open heart surgery a case report of an unusual postoperative Gastrointestinal Complication
Journal of Surgical Case Reports, 2020Co-Authors: Derrick Acheampong, Percy BoatengAbstract:Diverticulitis, though a common Gastrointestinal disease, is rare following open-heart surgery. There is insufficient data regarding its incidence and management post-cardiac surgery. Especially in patients with atypical presentation, diagnosis and management can be challenging. This case outlines one such atypical diverticulitis case in which a 57-year-old female patient developed perforated diverticulitis with pelvic abscess accumulation following left ventricular aneurysm (LVA) repair. Diagnosis, appropriate management and treatment approaches are discussed. Cardiac surgeons should consider the possibility of diverticulitis in patients reporting nonspecific abdominal pain following cardiac surgery to ensure early diagnosis and institution of appropriate treatment to prevent associated adverse outcomes.
