The Experts below are selected from a list of 321 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Magnus Björkholm - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
patients perceptions of having a central venous catheter or a totally implantable Subcutaneous Port system results from a randomised study in acute leukaemia
Supportive Care in Cancer, 2009Co-Authors: Eva Johansson, Hjördis Björvell, Robert Hast, Per Engervall, Magnus BjörkholmAbstract:The selection process of type of central venous access device (CVAD) in patients with acute leukaemia (AL) is generally based on appropriate catheter capacity/function and risk of complications in relation to the planned length of therapy. Advantages and disadvantages of the CVAD from the patient’s perspective should also be imPortant parts in the selection of type of device. Perceptions on having a CVAD were thus analysed in a series of adult patients with AL included in a prospective randomised study evaluating the use of a double lumen totally implantable Subcutaneous Port system (Port) or a double lumen central venous catheter (CVC) regarding survival time and complication rate. Perceptions were registered in 32 patients (median age 68 years, range 24–83 years) on three occasions (T1; the day after placement, T2; 3 weeks after placement and T3 after 12 weeks and/or when the CVAD was removed) with the use of two study specific questionnaires. Overall, many patients rePorted minor catheter related discomfort, feelings of anxiety and restrictions. Half of the patients (6/11) who experienced a local bleeding after CVAD insertion described the placement procedure as unpleasant. More patients in the CVC group compared with the Port group stated that they thought of having a CVAD (T3; p = 0.02) and that the CVAD interfered when dressing themselves (T2; p = 0.02 and T3; 0.04) or taking a shower (T3; p = 0.009). Our findings supPort the view that the Port is less restrictive in daily life than the CVC.
-
Patients’ perceptions of having a central venous catheter or a totally implantable Subcutaneous Port system–results from a randomised study in acute leukaemia
Supportive Care in Cancer, 2009Co-Authors: Eva Johansson, Hjördis Björvell, Robert Hast, Per Engervall, Magnus BjörkholmAbstract:Goals of work The selection process of type of central venous access device (CVAD) in patients with acute leukaemia (AL) is generally based on appropriate catheter capacity/function and risk of complications in relation to the planned length of therapy. Advantages and disadvantages of the CVAD from the patient’s perspective should also be imPortant parts in the selection of type of device. Perceptions on having a CVAD were thus analysed in a series of adult patients with AL included in a prospective randomised study evaluating the use of a double lumen totally implantable Subcutaneous Port system (Port) or a double lumen central venous catheter (CVC) regarding survival time and complication rate. Materials and methods Perceptions were registered in 32 patients (median age 68 years, range 24–83 years) on three occasions (T1; the day after placement, T2; 3 weeks after placement and T3 after 12 weeks and/or when the CVAD was removed) with the use of two study specific questionnaires. Main results Overall, many patients rePorted minor catheter related discomfort, feelings of anxiety and restrictions. Half of the patients (6/11) who experienced a local bleeding after CVAD insertion described the placement procedure as unpleasant. More patients in the CVC group compared with the Port group stated that they thought of having a CVAD (T3; p = 0.02) and that the CVAD interfered when dressing themselves (T2; p = 0.02 and T3; 0.04) or taking a shower (T3; p = 0.009). Conclusion Our findings supPort the view that the Port is less restrictive in daily life than the CVC.
-
Totally implantable Subcutaneous Port system versus central venous catheter placed before induction chemotherapy in patients with acute leukaemia—a randomized study
Supportive Care in Cancer, 2004Co-Authors: Eva Johansson, Magnus Björkholm, Hjördis Björvell, Robert Hast, Rabbe Takolander, Per Olofsson, Lars Backman, Eddie Weitzberg, Per EngervallAbstract:A group of 43 adult patients with acute leukaemia (AL) were randomized to receive a double-lumen totally implantable Subcutaneous Port system (Port, n =19) or a double-lumen central venous catheter (CVC, n =24) before induction chemotherapy. Six patients were excluded due to protocol violation ( n =4, CVC) and technical difficulties ( n =2, Port). A standardized catheter record form was used for recording of catheter function, local infection and bleeding. The study was prematurely closed due to extensive Subcutaneous bleeding after placement in five patients with a Port. Intention to treat ( n =43) or per protocol (PP) analysis ( n =37) did not reveal a significant difference between the two groups with regard to catheter survival time (PP Port, median 113 days, range 2–634 days; CVC, 55 days, 11–223 days). The number of positive blood cultures per 100 central venous access device days was significantly higher in the CVC group (median 3.6 per 100 days) than in the Port group (0.9 per 100 days; P =0.02). In addition, the time to the first blood culture positive for coagulase-negative staphylococcus was shorter in the CVC group (median 14 days) than in the Port group (52 days; P =0.02). Despite fewer infectious complications in the Port group the use of a double-lumen CVC is advocated in patients with AL undergoing induction treatment due to the risk of extensive local bleeding after placement of the Port.
Eva Johansson - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
patients perceptions of having a central venous catheter or a totally implantable Subcutaneous Port system results from a randomised study in acute leukaemia
Supportive Care in Cancer, 2009Co-Authors: Eva Johansson, Hjördis Björvell, Robert Hast, Per Engervall, Magnus BjörkholmAbstract:The selection process of type of central venous access device (CVAD) in patients with acute leukaemia (AL) is generally based on appropriate catheter capacity/function and risk of complications in relation to the planned length of therapy. Advantages and disadvantages of the CVAD from the patient’s perspective should also be imPortant parts in the selection of type of device. Perceptions on having a CVAD were thus analysed in a series of adult patients with AL included in a prospective randomised study evaluating the use of a double lumen totally implantable Subcutaneous Port system (Port) or a double lumen central venous catheter (CVC) regarding survival time and complication rate. Perceptions were registered in 32 patients (median age 68 years, range 24–83 years) on three occasions (T1; the day after placement, T2; 3 weeks after placement and T3 after 12 weeks and/or when the CVAD was removed) with the use of two study specific questionnaires. Overall, many patients rePorted minor catheter related discomfort, feelings of anxiety and restrictions. Half of the patients (6/11) who experienced a local bleeding after CVAD insertion described the placement procedure as unpleasant. More patients in the CVC group compared with the Port group stated that they thought of having a CVAD (T3; p = 0.02) and that the CVAD interfered when dressing themselves (T2; p = 0.02 and T3; 0.04) or taking a shower (T3; p = 0.009). Our findings supPort the view that the Port is less restrictive in daily life than the CVC.
-
Patients’ perceptions of having a central venous catheter or a totally implantable Subcutaneous Port system–results from a randomised study in acute leukaemia
Supportive Care in Cancer, 2009Co-Authors: Eva Johansson, Hjördis Björvell, Robert Hast, Per Engervall, Magnus BjörkholmAbstract:Goals of work The selection process of type of central venous access device (CVAD) in patients with acute leukaemia (AL) is generally based on appropriate catheter capacity/function and risk of complications in relation to the planned length of therapy. Advantages and disadvantages of the CVAD from the patient’s perspective should also be imPortant parts in the selection of type of device. Perceptions on having a CVAD were thus analysed in a series of adult patients with AL included in a prospective randomised study evaluating the use of a double lumen totally implantable Subcutaneous Port system (Port) or a double lumen central venous catheter (CVC) regarding survival time and complication rate. Materials and methods Perceptions were registered in 32 patients (median age 68 years, range 24–83 years) on three occasions (T1; the day after placement, T2; 3 weeks after placement and T3 after 12 weeks and/or when the CVAD was removed) with the use of two study specific questionnaires. Main results Overall, many patients rePorted minor catheter related discomfort, feelings of anxiety and restrictions. Half of the patients (6/11) who experienced a local bleeding after CVAD insertion described the placement procedure as unpleasant. More patients in the CVC group compared with the Port group stated that they thought of having a CVAD (T3; p = 0.02) and that the CVAD interfered when dressing themselves (T2; p = 0.02 and T3; 0.04) or taking a shower (T3; p = 0.009). Conclusion Our findings supPort the view that the Port is less restrictive in daily life than the CVC.
-
Totally implantable Subcutaneous Port system versus central venous catheter placed before induction chemotherapy in patients with acute leukaemia—a randomized study
Supportive Care in Cancer, 2004Co-Authors: Eva Johansson, Magnus Björkholm, Hjördis Björvell, Robert Hast, Rabbe Takolander, Per Olofsson, Lars Backman, Eddie Weitzberg, Per EngervallAbstract:A group of 43 adult patients with acute leukaemia (AL) were randomized to receive a double-lumen totally implantable Subcutaneous Port system (Port, n =19) or a double-lumen central venous catheter (CVC, n =24) before induction chemotherapy. Six patients were excluded due to protocol violation ( n =4, CVC) and technical difficulties ( n =2, Port). A standardized catheter record form was used for recording of catheter function, local infection and bleeding. The study was prematurely closed due to extensive Subcutaneous bleeding after placement in five patients with a Port. Intention to treat ( n =43) or per protocol (PP) analysis ( n =37) did not reveal a significant difference between the two groups with regard to catheter survival time (PP Port, median 113 days, range 2–634 days; CVC, 55 days, 11–223 days). The number of positive blood cultures per 100 central venous access device days was significantly higher in the CVC group (median 3.6 per 100 days) than in the Port group (0.9 per 100 days; P =0.02). In addition, the time to the first blood culture positive for coagulase-negative staphylococcus was shorter in the CVC group (median 14 days) than in the Port group (52 days; P =0.02). Despite fewer infectious complications in the Port group the use of a double-lumen CVC is advocated in patients with AL undergoing induction treatment due to the risk of extensive local bleeding after placement of the Port.
Per Engervall - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
patients perceptions of having a central venous catheter or a totally implantable Subcutaneous Port system results from a randomised study in acute leukaemia
Supportive Care in Cancer, 2009Co-Authors: Eva Johansson, Hjördis Björvell, Robert Hast, Per Engervall, Magnus BjörkholmAbstract:The selection process of type of central venous access device (CVAD) in patients with acute leukaemia (AL) is generally based on appropriate catheter capacity/function and risk of complications in relation to the planned length of therapy. Advantages and disadvantages of the CVAD from the patient’s perspective should also be imPortant parts in the selection of type of device. Perceptions on having a CVAD were thus analysed in a series of adult patients with AL included in a prospective randomised study evaluating the use of a double lumen totally implantable Subcutaneous Port system (Port) or a double lumen central venous catheter (CVC) regarding survival time and complication rate. Perceptions were registered in 32 patients (median age 68 years, range 24–83 years) on three occasions (T1; the day after placement, T2; 3 weeks after placement and T3 after 12 weeks and/or when the CVAD was removed) with the use of two study specific questionnaires. Overall, many patients rePorted minor catheter related discomfort, feelings of anxiety and restrictions. Half of the patients (6/11) who experienced a local bleeding after CVAD insertion described the placement procedure as unpleasant. More patients in the CVC group compared with the Port group stated that they thought of having a CVAD (T3; p = 0.02) and that the CVAD interfered when dressing themselves (T2; p = 0.02 and T3; 0.04) or taking a shower (T3; p = 0.009). Our findings supPort the view that the Port is less restrictive in daily life than the CVC.
-
Patients’ perceptions of having a central venous catheter or a totally implantable Subcutaneous Port system–results from a randomised study in acute leukaemia
Supportive Care in Cancer, 2009Co-Authors: Eva Johansson, Hjördis Björvell, Robert Hast, Per Engervall, Magnus BjörkholmAbstract:Goals of work The selection process of type of central venous access device (CVAD) in patients with acute leukaemia (AL) is generally based on appropriate catheter capacity/function and risk of complications in relation to the planned length of therapy. Advantages and disadvantages of the CVAD from the patient’s perspective should also be imPortant parts in the selection of type of device. Perceptions on having a CVAD were thus analysed in a series of adult patients with AL included in a prospective randomised study evaluating the use of a double lumen totally implantable Subcutaneous Port system (Port) or a double lumen central venous catheter (CVC) regarding survival time and complication rate. Materials and methods Perceptions were registered in 32 patients (median age 68 years, range 24–83 years) on three occasions (T1; the day after placement, T2; 3 weeks after placement and T3 after 12 weeks and/or when the CVAD was removed) with the use of two study specific questionnaires. Main results Overall, many patients rePorted minor catheter related discomfort, feelings of anxiety and restrictions. Half of the patients (6/11) who experienced a local bleeding after CVAD insertion described the placement procedure as unpleasant. More patients in the CVC group compared with the Port group stated that they thought of having a CVAD (T3; p = 0.02) and that the CVAD interfered when dressing themselves (T2; p = 0.02 and T3; 0.04) or taking a shower (T3; p = 0.009). Conclusion Our findings supPort the view that the Port is less restrictive in daily life than the CVC.
-
Totally implantable Subcutaneous Port system versus central venous catheter placed before induction chemotherapy in patients with acute leukaemia—a randomized study
Supportive Care in Cancer, 2004Co-Authors: Eva Johansson, Magnus Björkholm, Hjördis Björvell, Robert Hast, Rabbe Takolander, Per Olofsson, Lars Backman, Eddie Weitzberg, Per EngervallAbstract:A group of 43 adult patients with acute leukaemia (AL) were randomized to receive a double-lumen totally implantable Subcutaneous Port system (Port, n =19) or a double-lumen central venous catheter (CVC, n =24) before induction chemotherapy. Six patients were excluded due to protocol violation ( n =4, CVC) and technical difficulties ( n =2, Port). A standardized catheter record form was used for recording of catheter function, local infection and bleeding. The study was prematurely closed due to extensive Subcutaneous bleeding after placement in five patients with a Port. Intention to treat ( n =43) or per protocol (PP) analysis ( n =37) did not reveal a significant difference between the two groups with regard to catheter survival time (PP Port, median 113 days, range 2–634 days; CVC, 55 days, 11–223 days). The number of positive blood cultures per 100 central venous access device days was significantly higher in the CVC group (median 3.6 per 100 days) than in the Port group (0.9 per 100 days; P =0.02). In addition, the time to the first blood culture positive for coagulase-negative staphylococcus was shorter in the CVC group (median 14 days) than in the Port group (52 days; P =0.02). Despite fewer infectious complications in the Port group the use of a double-lumen CVC is advocated in patients with AL undergoing induction treatment due to the risk of extensive local bleeding after placement of the Port.
S Nemoto - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
correction to development of a simple device enabling percutaneous flow regulation for a small vascular graft for a blalock taussig shunt capable of flow regulation complete translation of an original article originally published in pediatric cardiol
The Japanese Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, 2018Co-Authors: Yoshikazu Motohashi, Ryo Shimada, Tomoyasu Sasaki, Takahiro Katsumata, Yasuhiro Tsutsui, S NemotoAbstract:The Blalock–Taussig shunt (BTS) operation is a cornerstone as initial palliative surgery for congenital heart disease with severely reduced pulmonary blood flow (PBF). The ideal PBF provided by BTS is crucial for an uneventful postoperative course, since excess PBF results in acute distress of the systemic circulation and insufficient PBF requires another BTS surgery. Therefore, the goal of this study was to develop a simple device to control the shunt graft flow percutaneously using a constrictor balloon connected to a Subcutaneous Port. The device consists of a cylindrical balloon and an anti-bending structure extension connected to the balloon center. A PTFE vascular graft wrapped by the device was connected to a simulated closed circuit to measure the relationship between pressure and blood flow while changing the inner volume of the balloon. In a beagle model of replacement of the right carotid artery, blood flow velocity was measured in the carotid artery after saline injection into the balloon. The blood flow velocity before and after balloon inflation was compared immediately after implantation of the device and at 3 months after implantation. The device provided good flow control by inflating and deflating the balloon ex vivo and in vivo for up to 3 months in a canine model with a small graft wrapped with the device. The simple device developed in this study may enable regulation of PBF through a small vascular graft and help to prevent severe morbidity and mortality in the clinical setting of BTS.
-
Development of a simple device enabling percutaneous flow regulation for a small vascular graft for a Blalock–Taussig shunt capable of flow regulation: complete translation of a review article originally published in Pediatric Cardiology and Cardiac
General Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, 2018Co-Authors: Yoshikazu Motohashi, Ryo Shimada, Tomoyasu Sasaki, Takahiro Katsumata, Yasuhiro Tsutsui, S NemotoAbstract:Objectives The Blalock–Taussig shunt (BTS) operation is a cornerstone as initial palliative surgery for congenital heart disease with severely reduced pulmonary blood flow (PBF). The ideal PBF provided by BTS is crucial for an uneventful postoperative course, since excess PBF results in acute distress of the systemic circulation and insufficient PBF requires another BTS surgery. Therefore, the goal of this study was to develop a simple device to control the shunt graft flow percutaneously using a constrictor balloon connected to a Subcutaneous Port. Methods The device consists of a cylindrical balloon and an anti-bending structure extension connected to the balloon center. A PTFE vascular graft wrapped by the device was connected to a simulated closed circuit to measure the relationship between pressure and blood flow while changing the inner volume of the balloon. In a beagle model of replacement of the right carotid artery, blood flow velocity was measured in the carotid artery after saline injection into the balloon. The blood flow velocity before and after balloon inflation was compared immediately after implantation of the device and at 3 months after implantation. Results The device provided good flow control by inflating and deflating the balloon ex vivo and in vivo for up to 3 months in a canine model with a small graft wrapped with the device. Conclusions The simple device developed in this study may enable regulation of PBF through a small vascular graft and help to prevent severe morbidity and mortality in the clinical setting of BTS.
Hjördis Björvell - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
patients perceptions of having a central venous catheter or a totally implantable Subcutaneous Port system results from a randomised study in acute leukaemia
Supportive Care in Cancer, 2009Co-Authors: Eva Johansson, Hjördis Björvell, Robert Hast, Per Engervall, Magnus BjörkholmAbstract:The selection process of type of central venous access device (CVAD) in patients with acute leukaemia (AL) is generally based on appropriate catheter capacity/function and risk of complications in relation to the planned length of therapy. Advantages and disadvantages of the CVAD from the patient’s perspective should also be imPortant parts in the selection of type of device. Perceptions on having a CVAD were thus analysed in a series of adult patients with AL included in a prospective randomised study evaluating the use of a double lumen totally implantable Subcutaneous Port system (Port) or a double lumen central venous catheter (CVC) regarding survival time and complication rate. Perceptions were registered in 32 patients (median age 68 years, range 24–83 years) on three occasions (T1; the day after placement, T2; 3 weeks after placement and T3 after 12 weeks and/or when the CVAD was removed) with the use of two study specific questionnaires. Overall, many patients rePorted minor catheter related discomfort, feelings of anxiety and restrictions. Half of the patients (6/11) who experienced a local bleeding after CVAD insertion described the placement procedure as unpleasant. More patients in the CVC group compared with the Port group stated that they thought of having a CVAD (T3; p = 0.02) and that the CVAD interfered when dressing themselves (T2; p = 0.02 and T3; 0.04) or taking a shower (T3; p = 0.009). Our findings supPort the view that the Port is less restrictive in daily life than the CVC.
-
Patients’ perceptions of having a central venous catheter or a totally implantable Subcutaneous Port system–results from a randomised study in acute leukaemia
Supportive Care in Cancer, 2009Co-Authors: Eva Johansson, Hjördis Björvell, Robert Hast, Per Engervall, Magnus BjörkholmAbstract:Goals of work The selection process of type of central venous access device (CVAD) in patients with acute leukaemia (AL) is generally based on appropriate catheter capacity/function and risk of complications in relation to the planned length of therapy. Advantages and disadvantages of the CVAD from the patient’s perspective should also be imPortant parts in the selection of type of device. Perceptions on having a CVAD were thus analysed in a series of adult patients with AL included in a prospective randomised study evaluating the use of a double lumen totally implantable Subcutaneous Port system (Port) or a double lumen central venous catheter (CVC) regarding survival time and complication rate. Materials and methods Perceptions were registered in 32 patients (median age 68 years, range 24–83 years) on three occasions (T1; the day after placement, T2; 3 weeks after placement and T3 after 12 weeks and/or when the CVAD was removed) with the use of two study specific questionnaires. Main results Overall, many patients rePorted minor catheter related discomfort, feelings of anxiety and restrictions. Half of the patients (6/11) who experienced a local bleeding after CVAD insertion described the placement procedure as unpleasant. More patients in the CVC group compared with the Port group stated that they thought of having a CVAD (T3; p = 0.02) and that the CVAD interfered when dressing themselves (T2; p = 0.02 and T3; 0.04) or taking a shower (T3; p = 0.009). Conclusion Our findings supPort the view that the Port is less restrictive in daily life than the CVC.
-
Totally implantable Subcutaneous Port system versus central venous catheter placed before induction chemotherapy in patients with acute leukaemia—a randomized study
Supportive Care in Cancer, 2004Co-Authors: Eva Johansson, Magnus Björkholm, Hjördis Björvell, Robert Hast, Rabbe Takolander, Per Olofsson, Lars Backman, Eddie Weitzberg, Per EngervallAbstract:A group of 43 adult patients with acute leukaemia (AL) were randomized to receive a double-lumen totally implantable Subcutaneous Port system (Port, n =19) or a double-lumen central venous catheter (CVC, n =24) before induction chemotherapy. Six patients were excluded due to protocol violation ( n =4, CVC) and technical difficulties ( n =2, Port). A standardized catheter record form was used for recording of catheter function, local infection and bleeding. The study was prematurely closed due to extensive Subcutaneous bleeding after placement in five patients with a Port. Intention to treat ( n =43) or per protocol (PP) analysis ( n =37) did not reveal a significant difference between the two groups with regard to catheter survival time (PP Port, median 113 days, range 2–634 days; CVC, 55 days, 11–223 days). The number of positive blood cultures per 100 central venous access device days was significantly higher in the CVC group (median 3.6 per 100 days) than in the Port group (0.9 per 100 days; P =0.02). In addition, the time to the first blood culture positive for coagulase-negative staphylococcus was shorter in the CVC group (median 14 days) than in the Port group (52 days; P =0.02). Despite fewer infectious complications in the Port group the use of a double-lumen CVC is advocated in patients with AL undergoing induction treatment due to the risk of extensive local bleeding after placement of the Port.
