Search Results Heading

MBRLSearchResults

mbrl.module.common.modules.added.book.to.shelf
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
    Done
    Filters
    Reset
  • Discipline
      Discipline
      Clear All
      Discipline
  • Is Peer Reviewed
      Is Peer Reviewed
      Clear All
      Is Peer Reviewed
  • Item Type
      Item Type
      Clear All
      Item Type
  • Subject
      Subject
      Clear All
      Subject
  • Year
      Year
      Clear All
      From:
      -
      To:
  • More Filters
4 result(s) for "Prager, Nelson"
Sort by:
Pulmonary vein reconnection following catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation using the second-generation cryoballoon versus open-irrigated radiofrequency: results of a multicenter analysis
Purpose Catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (CAAF) using the cryoballoon has emerged as an alternate strategy to point-by-point radiofrequency. However, there is little comparative data on long-term durability of pulmonary vein (PV) isolation comparing these two modalities. Methods In this multicenter, retrospective analysis, the incidences/patterns of late PV reconnection following an index CAAF using the second-generation cryoballoon versus open-irrigated, non-force-sensing radiofrequency were examined. Results Of the 2002 patients who underwent a first-time CAAF, 186/1126 patients (16.5 %) ablated using cryoballoon and 174/876 patients (19.9 %) with non-contact force-guided radiofrequency required a repeat procedure at 11 ± 5 months. During follow-up, the incidence of atrial flutters/tachycardias was lower (19.9 vs. 32.8 %; p  = 0.005) and fewer patients exhibited PV reconnection (47.3 vs. 60.9 %; p  = 0.007) with cryoballoon versus radiofrequency. Additionally, fewer PVs had reconnected with cryoballoon versus radiofrequency (18.8 vs. 34.6 %; p  < 0.001). With cryoballoon, the right inferior ( p  < 0.001) and left common ( p  = 0.039) PVs were more likely to exhibit late reconnection, versus the left superior PV with radiofrequency ( p  = 0.012). However, when comparing the two strategies, the left common PV was more likely to exhibit reconnection with cryoballoon, whereas all other PVs with the exception of the right inferior PV demonstrated a lower reconnection rate with cryoballoon versus radiofrequency. Lastly, in a logistic regression multivariate analysis, cryoballoon ablation and PV ablation time emerged as significant predictors of durable PV isolation at repeat procedure. Conclusions In this large multicenter, retrospective analysis, CAAF using the second-generation cryoballoon was associated with improved durability of PV isolation compared to open-irrigated, non-force-sensing radiofrequency.
Balloon catheters versus vaginal prostaglandins for labour induction (CPI Collaborative): an individual participant data meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
Induction of labour is one of the most common obstetric interventions globally. Balloon catheters and vaginal prostaglandins are widely used to ripen the cervix in labour induction. We aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety profiles of these two induction methods. We did an individual participant data meta-analysis comparing balloon catheters and vaginal prostaglandins for cervical ripening before labour induction. We systematically identified published and unpublished randomised controlled trials that completed data collection between March 19, 2019, and May 1, 2021, by searching the Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and PubMed. Further trials done before March 19, 2019, were identified through a recent Cochrane review. Data relating to the combined use of the two methods were not included, only data from women with a viable, singleton pregnancy were analysed, and no exclusion was made based on parity or membrane status. We contacted authors of individuals trials and participant-level data were harmonised and recoded according to predefined definitions of variables. Risk of bias was assessed with the ROB2 tool. The primary outcomes were caesarean delivery, indication for caesarean delivery, a composite adverse perinatal outcome, and a composite adverse maternal outcome. We followed the intention-to-treat principle for the main analysis. The primary meta-analysis used two-stage random-effects models and the sensitivity analysis used one-stage mixed models. All models were adjusted for maternal age and parity. This meta-analysis is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020179924). Individual participant data were available from 12 studies with a total of 5460 participants. Balloon catheters, compared with vaginal prostaglandins, did not lead to a significantly different rate of caesarean delivery (12 trials, 5414 women; crude incidence 27·0%; adjusted OR [aOR] 1·09, 95% CI 0·95–1·24; I2=0%), caesarean delivery for failure to progress (11 trials, 4601 women; aOR 1·20, 95% CI 0·91–1·58; I2=39%), or caesarean delivery for fetal distress (10 trials, 4441 women; aOR 0·86, 95% CI 0·71–1·04; I2=0%). The composite adverse perinatal outcome was lower in women who were allocated to balloon catheters than in those allocated to vaginal prostaglandins (ten trials, 4452 neonates, crude incidence 13·6%; aOR 0·80, 95% CI 0·70–0·92; I2=0%). There was no significant difference in the composite adverse maternal outcome (ten trials, 4326 women, crude incidence 22·7%; aOR 1·02, 95% CI 0·89–1·18; I2=0%). In induction of labour, balloon catheters and vaginal prostaglandins have comparable caesarean delivery rates and maternal safety profiles, but balloon catheters lead to fewer adverse perinatal events. Australian National Health and Medical Research Council and Monash Health Emerging Researcher Fellowship.
The first modified Delphi consensus statement on sleeve gastrectomy
IntroductionSleeve gastrectomy (SG) is the commonest bariatric procedure worldwide. Yet there is significant variation in practice concerning its various aspects. This paper report results from the first modified Delphi consensus-building exercise on SG.MethodsWe established a committee of 54 globally recognized opinion makers in this field. The committee agreed to vote on several statements concerning SG. An agreement or disagreement amongst ≥ 70.0% experts was construed as a consensus.ResultsThe committee achieved a consensus of agreement (n = 71) or disagreement (n = 7) for 78 out of 97 proposed statements after two rounds of voting. The committee agreed with 96.3% consensus that the characterization of SG as a purely restrictive procedure was inaccurate and there was 88.7% consensus that SG was not a suitable standalone, primary, surgical weight loss option for patients with Barrett’s esophagus (BE) without dysplasia. There was an overwhelming consensus of 92.5% that the sleeve should be fashioned over an orogastric tube of 36–40 Fr and a 90.7% consensus that surgeons should stay at least 1 cm away from the angle of His. Remarkably, the committee agreed with 81.1% consensus that SG patients should undergo a screening endoscopy every 5 years after surgery to screen for BE.ConclusionA multinational team of experts achieved consensus on several aspects of SG. The findings of this exercise should help improve the outcomes of SG, the commonest bariatric procedure worldwide, and guide future research on this topic.