Notes![what is notes.io? What is notes.io?](/theme/images/whatisnotesio.png)
![]() ![]() Notes - notes.io |
BACKGROUND Rapid and selective bromelain-based enzymatic debridement provides a non-surgical alternative for the eschar removal in deep burns, which allows for early debridement of large surface areas, accurate evaluation of burn and wound depth, and the need for skin grafting. OBJECTIVES To evaluate the efficacy of application of a bromelain-based selective enzymatic debridement (Nexobrid®) beyond the manufacturer's guidelines for use in burns > 48 hours as well as chemical, electrical, and pediatric burns, and chronic wounds. METHODS This retrospective review included records collected between January 2017 and April 2019, from male and female patients aged 8 months to 99 years with deep burns or wounds treated with bromelain-based selective enzymatic debridement. RESULTS Of the 33 patients who received the bromelain-based selective enzymatic debridement agent beyond the manufacturer's guidelines, 25 (76%) were observed to have successful debridement of the eschar, 8 (24%) were observed to have little effect on the burn eschar. Sixteen required further surgery after debridement. Clinical data on the use of bromelain-based selective enzymatic debridement agents are limited, but these results suggest the capacity to effectively debride burns > 48 hours (late presentation burns), use for pediatrics and for chemical and electrical burns, and apply to hard to heal full thickness chronic wounds. CONCLUSIONS Bromelain-based selective enzymatic debridement was found to be an effective treatment modality beyond the recommended guidelines including late presentation burns and chronic wounds. This debridement method warrants further consideration when making clinical decisions concerning burn and wound care.BACKGROUND Post-pericardiotomy syndrome (PPS) is a major cause of pericarditis, yet data on the risk of recurrence are limited, and the impact of steroids and colchicine in this context is unknown. OBJECTIVES To examine the effect of prednisone and colchicine on the rate of recurrence of PPS. METHODS Medical files of patients diagnosed with PPS were reviewed to extract demographic, echocardiographic, X-ray imaging, and follow-up data. RESULTS The study comprised 132 patients (57% men), aged 27-86 years. Medical treatment included prednisone in 80 patients, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agents in 41 patients, colchicine monotherapy in 2 patients, and no anti-inflammatory therapy in 9 patients. Fifty-nine patients were given colchicine for prevention of recurrence. The patients were followed for 5-110 months (median 64 months). Recurrent episodes occurred in 15 patients (11.4%), 10 patients had a single episode, 4 patients had two episodes, and one patient had three episodes. The rate of recurrence was lower in patients receiving colchicine compared to patients who did not (8.5% vs. 13.7%), and in patients not receiving vs. receiving prednisone (7.7% vs. 13.8%) but the differences were non-significant. Twenty-three patients died and there were no recurrence-related deaths. CONCLUSIONS The rate of recurrence after PPS is low and multiple recurrences are rare. The survival of patients with recurrent PPS is excellent. Prednisone pre-treatment was associated with a numerically higher rate of recurrence and colchicine treatment with a numerically lower rate, but the differences were non-significant.BACKGROUND The treatment of elderly patients with advanced stage ovarian carcinoma is challenging due to a high morbidity. OBJECTIVES To evaluate the clinical course and outcome of elderly patients with advanced stage ovarian carcinoma receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT). METHODS A retrospective study of all patients with stage IIIC and IV ovarian carcinoma receiving NACT in one medical center (between 2005 and 2017). The study group criteria age was above 70 years. The control group criteria was younger than 70 years old at diagnosis. Demographics and treatment outcomes were compared between groups. Primary outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). SF2312 inhibitor RESULTS Overall, 105 patients met the inclusion criteria, 71 patients (67.6%) were younger than 70 years and 34 patients (32.4%) older. Rates of interval cytoreduction were significantly higher in younger patients (76.1% vs. 50.0%, P = 0.01). Of those who underwent interval cytoreduction, no difference was found in rates of optimal debulking between groups (83.35% vs. 100%, P = 0.10). Using a Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, no significant differences were observed between groups in PFS or OS, P > 0.05. Among the elderly group alone, patients who underwent interval cytoreduction had significantly longer PFS than those without surgical intervention (0.4 ± 1.7 vs. 19.3 ± 19.4 months, P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS Elderly patients with ovarian carcinoma who received NACT undergo less interval cytoreduction than younger patients, with no difference in PFS and OS. However, among the elderly, interval cytoreduction is associated with significantly higher PFS.BACKGROUND The introduction of pneumococcal conjugate vaccine-13 (PCV-13) has reduced the burden of invasive pneumococcal disease. OBJECTIVES To characterize true positive blood cultures of children who presented to our hospital following implementation of the PCV-13 vaccine. METHODS A retrospective study was conducted on positive blood cultures of children presenting with fever from 2010-2017. Subjects were divided into two age groups a younger group 3-36 months and an older group 3-18 years. Patients were classified as either having or not having a focus of infection at the time of their bacteremia. Pneumococcal isolates were typed at Israel's Streptococcal Reference Laboratory. RESULTS The samples included 94 true positive blood cultures. Focal infection with concomitant bacteremia was more common than bacteremia without a focus both overall 67/94 (71%) vs. 27/94 (28.7%), P less then 0.001 as well as in the two groups 32/48 (66%) vs. 16/48 (33%), P = 0.02 in the younger group and 35/46 (76%) vs. 11/46 (24%), P = 0.001 in the older group. Streptococcus pneumoniae was the most common pathogen overall, 27/94 (29%), and in the younger group, 21/48 (44%), but rare in the older group, 6/46 (13%). In the latter, Brucella species predominated, 12/46 (26%), along with Staphylococcus aureus 12/46 (26%). CONCLUSIONS Our findings are consistent with other studies reporting decreased pneumococcal bacteremia, bacteremia primarily accompanying focal infection, and changing etiological agents among PCV-13-vaccinated children. Brucella species was prominent in older children with osteoarticular infections. Ongoing surveillance is warranted to better understand the implications of PCV-13.
Homepage: https://www.selleckchem.com/products/sf2312.html
![]() |
Notes is a web-based application for online taking notes. You can take your notes and share with others people. If you like taking long notes, notes.io is designed for you. To date, over 8,000,000,000+ notes created and continuing...
With notes.io;
- * You can take a note from anywhere and any device with internet connection.
- * You can share the notes in social platforms (YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, instagram etc.).
- * You can quickly share your contents without website, blog and e-mail.
- * You don't need to create any Account to share a note. As you wish you can use quick, easy and best shortened notes with sms, websites, e-mail, or messaging services (WhatsApp, iMessage, Telegram, Signal).
- * Notes.io has fabulous infrastructure design for a short link and allows you to share the note as an easy and understandable link.
Fast: Notes.io is built for speed and performance. You can take a notes quickly and browse your archive.
Easy: Notes.io doesn’t require installation. Just write and share note!
Short: Notes.io’s url just 8 character. You’ll get shorten link of your note when you want to share. (Ex: notes.io/q )
Free: Notes.io works for 14 years and has been free since the day it was started.
You immediately create your first note and start sharing with the ones you wish. If you want to contact us, you can use the following communication channels;
Email: [email protected]
Twitter: http://twitter.com/notesio
Instagram: http://instagram.com/notes.io
Facebook: http://facebook.com/notesio
Regards;
Notes.io Team