A novel catheterization laboratory radiation shielding system: Results of pre-clinical testing

Author(s):  
Simon R. Dixon ◽  
Maher Rabah ◽  
Scott Emerson ◽  
Cheryl Schultz ◽  
Ryan D. Madder
2015 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. 22-34 ◽  
Author(s):  
S.A. Washburn ◽  
S.R. Blattnig ◽  
R.C. Singleterry ◽  
S.C. Westover

2009 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-5
Author(s):  
Craig Uejo ◽  
Marjorie Eskay-Auerbach ◽  
Christopher R. Brigham

Abstract Evaluators who use the AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides), Sixth Edition, should understand the significant changes that have occurred (as well as the Clarifications and Corrections) in impairment ratings for disorders of the cervical spine, thoracic spine, lumbar spine, and pelvis. The new methodology is an expansion of the Diagnosis-related estimates (DRE) method used in the fifth edition, but the criteria for defining impairment are revised, and the impairment value within a class is refined by information related to functional status, physical examination findings, and the results of clinical testing. Because current medical evidence does not support range-of-motion (ROM) measurements of the spine as a reliable indicator of specific pathology or permanent functional status, ROM is no longer used as a basis for defining impairment. The DRE method should standardize and simplify the rating process, improve validity, and provide a more uniform methodology. Table 1 shows examples of spinal injury impairment rating (according to region of the spine and category, with comments about the diagnosis and the resulting class assignment); Table 2 shows examples of spine impairment by region of the spine, class, diagnosis, and associated whole person impairment ratings form the sixth and fifth editions of the AMA Guides.


2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
D Usta ◽  
F Selt ◽  
J Hohloch ◽  
S Pusch ◽  
SM Pfister ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
pp. 52-58 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. A. Eryomenko ◽  
N. V. Rostunova ◽  
S. A. Budagyan ◽  
V. V. Stets

The experience of clinical testing of the personal telemedicine system ‘Obereg’ for remote monitoring of patients at the intensive care units of leading Russian clinics is described. The high quality of communication with the remote receiving devices of doctors, the accuracy of measurements, resistance to interference from various hospital equipment and the absence of its own impact on such equipment were confirmed. There are significant advantages compared to stationary patient monitors, in particular, for intra and out-of-hospital transportation of patients.


2020 ◽  
pp. 44-49
Author(s):  
A. A. Eryomenko ◽  
N. V. Rostunova ◽  
S. A. Budagyan ◽  
L. S. Sorokina

The article describes the experience of clinical testing of the personal telemedicine system (PTS) ‘Obereg’ for remote monitoring of patients with the consequences of severe conditions in leading Russian clinics. It is shown that such patients are at high risk of complications when transferred from the ICU to a normal ward with limited medical supervision and lack of instrumentation. The use of remote monitoring using the personal telemedicine system ‘Obereg’ allows to solve this problem. The results of the use of PTS ‘Obereg’ for the organization of monitoring in the home patronage of patients with limited mobility are presented. It is indicated that such devices should be used in an emergency situation similar to a coronavirus pandemic to monitor patients who are in infectious boxes and on home treatment.


2011 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 87 ◽  
Author(s):  
Preeti Chandra ◽  
Saurav Chatterjee ◽  
Nishant Koradia ◽  
Deepak Thekkoott ◽  
Bilal Malik ◽  
...  

Background:Coronary perforation during percutaneous coronary intervention is a rare but dreaded complication. The risk factors, optimal management, and outcome remain obscure.Objectives:To determine the predisposing factors, optimal management, and preventive strategies. We retrospectively looked at coronary perforations at our catheterization laboratory over the last 10 years. We reviewed patient charts and reports. Two independent operators, in a blinded approach, reviewed all procedural cineangiograms. Data were analyzed by simple statistical methodology.Results:Nine patients were treated conservatively and six patients were treated with prolonged balloon inflation. Six patients were treated with polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE)-covered stents. One patient required emergency coronary artery bypass graft. No deaths were reported. Subjects with perforations also had a significantly higher total white blood cell count (means 12,134 versus 6,155, 95 % confidence interval [CI], p< 0.0001, n=22), total absolute neutrophil count (means 74.2 % versus 57.1 %, 95 % CI, p<0.0001, n=22), and neutrophil:lymphocyte ratio (means 3.65 versus 1.50, 95% CI, p<0.0001, n=22).Conclusions:Coronary perforations are rare but potentially fatal events. Hypertension, small vessel diameter, high balloon:artery ratio, use of hydrophilic wires, and presence of myocardial bridging appear to be possible risk factors. Most perforations can be treated conservatively or with prolonged balloon inflation using perfusion balloons. Use of PTFE-covered stents could be a life-saving measure in cases of large perforations. Subjects with perforations also had greater systemic inflammation as indicated by elevated white cell counts.


2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (08) ◽  
pp. 20193-20206 ◽  
Author(s):  
Md. Akhlak Bin Aziz ◽  
Md. Faisal Rahman ◽  
Md. Mahidul Haque Prodhan

The paper compares  Lead, Copper and Aluminium as gamma radiation shielding material using both experimental and simulation techniques. Cs- 137 (662KeV), Na-22 (511KeV) and Na- 22(1274KeV) were used as gamma radiation sources and a sodium iodide (NaI) detector was used to detect the radiation. Variations were noted for detected gamma count rates by changing shielding material thickness. In the experimental approach, thickness was varied by placing sheets of a particular test material one by one. For simulation, Monte Carlo n- Particle (MCNP) code version 4c was used and the geometry of the whole experimental setup was plotted in it. The results were then compared for each test material and it was found that lead is the best shielding material for gamma radiation followed by copper and aluminium.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document