Pilot study on the influence of liver blood flow and cardiac output on the clearance of propofol in critically ill patients

2007 ◽  
Vol 64 (3) ◽  
pp. 329-334 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mariska Y. M. Peeters ◽  
Leon P. H. J. Aarts ◽  
Ferenc A. Boom ◽  
Leo J. Bras ◽  
Dick Tibboel ◽  
...  
2003 ◽  
Vol 22 ◽  
pp. S54
Author(s):  
P. Glen ◽  
D.C. McMillan ◽  
E. Leen ◽  
W.J. Angerson ◽  
J. Kinsella

Author(s):  
Zahide Karaca ◽  
Recep C. Yuksel ◽  
Gulsah Gunes Sahin ◽  
Neslihan Sungur ◽  
Sahin Temel ◽  
...  

Medicina ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 57 (3) ◽  
pp. 257
Author(s):  
Livius Tirnea ◽  
Felix Bratosin ◽  
Iulia Vidican ◽  
Bianca Cerbu ◽  
Mirela Turaiche ◽  
...  

Background and Objectives: On 24 March 2020, the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced the approval of convalescent plasma therapy for critically ill patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) as an emergency investigational new drug. This pilot study from Romania aimed to determine if convalescent plasma transfusion can be beneficial in the treatment of selected critically ill patients diagnosed with a SARS-CoV-2 infection. Materials and Methods: Donor and receiver eligibility for critically ill coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients was based on Romanian guidelines issued at the time of the study. Here, we describe the evolution of a total of five eligible patients diagnosed with COVID-19 who received convalescent plasma (CP) in Romania. Results: In spite of our efforts and convalescent plasma administration, three of the five patients did not survive, while the other two recovered completely. Over the course of our five-day laboratory record, the surviving patients had significantly lower values for C-reactive protein, interleukin-6, and white blood cells. Conclusions: This pilot study provides insufficient evidence to determine the efficacy of convalescent plasma use as a therapeutic option for critically ill COVID-19 patients.


2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Geert Koster ◽  
Thomas Kaufmann ◽  
Bart Hiemstra ◽  
Renske Wiersema ◽  
Madelon E. Vos ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Critical care ultrasonography (CCUS) is increasingly applied also in the intensive care unit (ICU) and performed by non-experts, including even medical students. There is limited data on the training efforts necessary for novices to attain images of sufficient quality. There is no data on medical students performing CCUS for the measurement of cardiac output (CO), a hemodynamic variable of importance for daily critical care. Objective The aim of this study was to explore the agreement of cardiac output measurements as well as the quality of images obtained by medical students in critically ill patients compared to the measurements obtained by experts in these images. Methods In a prospective observational cohort study, all acutely admitted adults with an expected ICU stay over 24 h were included. CCUS was performed by students within 24 h of admission. CCUS included the images required to measure the CO, i.e., the left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) diameter and the velocity time integral (VTI) in the LVOT. Echocardiography experts were involved in the evaluation of the quality of images obtained and the quality of the CO measurements. Results There was an opportunity for a CCUS attempt in 1155 of the 1212 eligible patients (95%) and in 1075 of the 1212 patients (89%) CCUS examination was performed by medical students. In 871 out of 1075 patients (81%) medical students measured CO. Experts measured CO in 783 patients (73%). In 760 patients (71%) CO was measured by both which allowed for comparison; bias of CO was 0.0 L min−1 with limits of agreement of − 2.6 L min−1 to 2.7 L min−1. The percentage error was 50%, reflecting poor agreement of the CO measurement by students compared with the experts CO measurement. Conclusions Medical students seem capable of obtaining sufficient quality CCUS images for CO measurement in the majority of critically ill patients. Measurements of CO by medical students, however, had poor agreement with expert measurements. Experts remain indispensable for reliable CO measurements. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov; http://www.clinicaltrials.gov; registration number NCT02912624


1992 ◽  
Vol 36 (6) ◽  
pp. 341
Author(s):  
P. ALTMAYER ◽  
U. GRUNDMANN ◽  
M. ZIEHMER ◽  
R. LARSEN ◽  
H. P. B??CH

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document