記述言語：日本語   出版者・発行元：(一社)日本集中治療医学会  

researchmap

記述言語：英語   掲載種別：研究論文（学術雑誌）  

Mechanical thrombectomy (MT) is the standard treatment for acute large occlusion of the cerebral artery. Evidence for the success of this procedure was based on the treatment of patients with internal carotid artery and middle cerebral artery thrombi. There are a few reports on thrombi extending to the common carotid artery (CCA). We document our endovascular procedure and the clinical outcome in seven consecutive patients who underwent MT for CCA thrombi between September 2016 and April 2021. Their mean National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score was 20.0 (range, 9-30), and the mean diffusion-weighted imaging Alberta Stroke Program Early Computed Tomography Score on magnetic resonance images was 8.7 (range, 7-10). In six patients, MT of the CCA occlusion was successful, and the mean puncture-to-reperfusion time was 84 minutes (range, 39-211 minutes). In five patients, successful reperfusion was obtained. The mean total pass number was 4.1 (range, 2-7). Due to large thrombi, we performed balloon guide catheter (BGC) occlusion in three patients. Sheath occlusion occurred in two, and thrombus migration into the femoral artery around the sheath was observed in two patients. The mean modified Rankin Scale score 3 months post-stroke was 3.6 (range, 2-5). When the removal of a large CCA thrombus is attempted in a single step, catheter and sheath occlusion may occur, and this increases the risk for critical systemic artery occlusion. Therefore, we suggest that MT be combined with the BGC technique and propose the use of a large aspiration catheter to decrease the volume of the thrombus.

DOI： 10.2176/jns-nmc.2022-0183

PubMed

researchmap

記述言語：英語   掲載種別：研究論文（学術雑誌）  

BACKGROUND AND IMPORTANCE: Complex pelvic injuries are among the types of trauma with the highest mortality. Treatment strategies should be based on the hemodynamic status, the anatomical type of fracture, and the associated injuries. Combination therapies, including preperitoneal pelvic packing, temporary mechanical stabilization, resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta, and angioembolization, are recommended for pelvic injuries. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of urgent angioembolization alone on severe pelvic injury-associated mortality. DESIGN, SETTINGS, AND PARTICIPANTS: We used the Japan Trauma Data Bank database, a multicenter observational study, to retrospectively identify adult patients with isolated blunt pelvic injuries (Abbreviated Injury Scale [AIS] score: 3-5) from 2004 to 2018. OUTCOME MEASURES AND ANALYSIS: The primary outcome measure was in-hospital mortality. We subdivided patients into two groups, those who underwent urgent angioembolization and non-urgent angioembolization, and compared their mortality rates. We performed multiple imputation and multivariable analyzes to compare the mortality rates between groups after adjusting for known potential confounding factors (age, sex, Glasgow Coma Scale score, systolic blood pressure on hospital arrival, Injury Severity Score, pelvic AIS score, laparotomy, resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta, and external fixation) and for within-hospital clustering using the generalized estimating equation. MAIN RESULTS: We analyzed 4207 of 345,932 trauma patients, of whom 799 underwent urgent angioembolization. The in-hospital mortality rate was significantly higher in the urgent embolization group than in the non-urgent embolization group (7.4 vs. 4.0%; p < 0.01). However, logistic regression analysis revealed that the mortality rates of patients with urgent angioembolization significantly decreased after adjusting for factors independently associated with mortality (odds ratio: 0.60; 95% confidence interval: 0.37-0.96; p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Urgent angioembolization may be an effective treatment for severe pelvic injury regardless of the pelvic AIS score and the systolic blood pressure on hospital arrival.

DOI： 10.1016/j.injury.2022.03.004

PubMed

researchmap

記述言語：英語   掲載種別：研究論文（学術雑誌）  

BACKGROUND: Only a few studies have reported the association between age and mortality in COVID-19 patients who require invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). We aimed to evaluate the effect of age on COVID-19-related mortality among patients undergoing IMV therapy. METHODS: This cohort study was conducted using the COVID-19 Registry Japan database, a nationwide multi-centre study of hospitalized patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19. Of all 33,808 cases registered between 1 January 2020 to 28 February 2021, we analysed 1555 patients who had undergone IMV. We evaluated mortality rates between age groups using multivariable regression analysis after adjusting for known potential components, such as within-hospital clustering, comorbidities, steroid use, medication for COVID-19, and vital signs on admission, using generalized estimation equation. RESULTS: By age group, the mortality rates in the IMV group were 8.6%, 20.7%, 34.9%, 49.7% and 83.3% for patients in their 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, and 90s, respectively. Multivariable analysis showed that compared with those for patients aged < 60 years, the odds ratios (95% confidence interval) of death were 2.6 (1.6-4.1), 6.9 (4.2-11.3), 13.2 (7.2-24.1), 92.6 (16.7-515.0) for patients in their 60s, 70s, 80s, and 90s, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort study, age had a great effect on mortality in COVID-19 patients undergoing IMV, after adjusting for variables independently associated with mortality. This study suggested that age was associated with higher mortality and that preventing progression to severe COVID-19 in elderly patients may be a great public health issue.

DOI： 10.1186/s13613-021-00959-6

PubMed

researchmap

記述言語：英語   掲載種別：研究論文（学術雑誌）  

Coagulation disorder is a major cause of death in sepsis patients. Recently, sepsis-induced coagulopathy (SIC) scoring was developed as a new criterion for coagulopathy-associated sepsis. We aimed to evaluate the accuracy of the SIC score for predicting the prognosis of septic shock. We analyzed data from a multicenter observational study conducted from 2011 to 2013. We grouped the participants into those who did and did not use vasopressors, and compared the in-hospital mortality rates of SIC and non-SIC patients. Patients who needed vasopressors were considered to have septic shock. We performed survival analysis adjusted by factors independently associated with mortality. SIC developed in 66.4% of patients who used vasopressors and 42.2% of patients who did not. The in-hospital mortality difference between the SIC and non-SIC groups was statistically significant in those who needed vasopressors (35.8% vs 27.9%, p < 0.01). Cox regression analysis indicated that SIC was significantly correlated with mortality risk in patients who used vasopressors (hazard ratio [HR] 1.39; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.13-1.70; p < 0.01), but not in those who did not (HR 1.38; 95% CI 0.81-2.34; p = 0.23). In conclusion, the SIC score might be a good diagnostic indicator of fatal coagulopathy among sepsis patients who need vasopressors.

DOI： 10.1007/s12185-021-03152-4

PubMed

researchmap