Time filter

Source Type

PubMed | San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Moscow Regional Clinical & Research Institute and State Research Institute of Circulation Pathology
Type: Comparative Study | Journal: Journal of critical care | Year: 2016

There is controversy about the use of inotropes in the treatment of severe sepsis and septic shock. The objective of this study was to evaluate if levosimendan, as compared with standard inotropic therapy (eg, dobutamine), reduces mortality in septic patients.BioMedCentral, PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register were searched for pertinent studies, up to 1st May 2015. Randomized trials on the use of levosimendan in patients with severe sepsis and septic shock were included if reporting mortality data. The primary outcome was mortality, whereas secondary outcomes were blood lactate, cardiac index, total fluid infused, norepinephrine dosage, and mean arterial pressure.Seven studies for a total of 246 patients were included in the analysis. Levosimendan was associated with significantly reduced mortality compared with standard inotropic therapy (59/125 [47%] in the levosimendan group and 74/121 [61%] in the control group; risk difference = -0.14, risk ratio = 0.79 [0.63-0.98], P for effect = .03, I(2) = 0%, numbers needed to treat = 7). Blood lactate was significantly reduced in the levosimendan group, whereas cardiac index and total fluid infused were significantly higher in the levosimendan group. No difference in mean arterial pressure and norepinephrine usage was noted.In patients with severe sepsis and septic shock, levosimendan is associated with a significant reduction in mortality compared with standard inotropic therapy. A large ongoing multicenter randomized trial will have to confirm these findings.


PubMed | Moscow Regional Clinical Research Institute
Type: Journal Article | Journal: Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology | Year: 2016

19508 Background: To analyse the five-year survival rate in patients with proximal femoral tumours after total hip replacement.Between the period of 1994-2003, 50 patients were operated (Total Hip Replacement) for proximal femoral tumours at the Department of General Oncology (Bone & Soft tissue tuomurs), N. N. Blokhin Cancer Research Institute & Moscow Regional Clinical Research Institute, Moscow, Russian Federation. The histological diagnoses included 14 - metastases, 10 - osteosarcoma, 8 - chondrosarcoma, 4 - Ewings sarcoma, 4 - Giant cell tumor, 3 - malignant fibrous histiocytoma, 2 paraosteal and 2 periosteal osteosarcoma, and 1 each from primary neuroectodermal tumor, myeloid disease, and aneurysmal bone cyst. The follow-up ranged from 1-9 years (mean follow-up 5 years). 21 patients (45.7%) had pathological fracture. The cause of the pathological fracture was metastasis in 12 patients (26%). 28 patients (60.8%), had soft tissue invasion. All the survival analyses were done using Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis method. Functional outcome was estimated using Ennekings evaluation criteria.The overall survival rate of patients was 66.7% at 5 years. 2 patients had local recurrence.12 patients had metastases after surgery. In that 11 patients were died. There was no evidence of disease in 32 patients. In 3 patients, we performed disarticulation of the hip joint because of the local recurrence. The overall survival rate of limb was 92.7% at 5 years. The overall survival rate of prostheses was 84.2% at 5 years. At the latest follow up, functional outcome was excellent in 15 (30%) patients, good in 27 (54%) patients, fair in 5 (10%) patients, poor in 3 (6%) patients.Though the extent of the muscle and bone resection is large, there is no doubt that endoprosthetic replacement of the proximal femur provides a good functional and oncological outcome when compared with the various other reconstructive surgeries. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Loading Moscow Regional Clinical & Research Institute collaborators
Loading Moscow Regional Clinical & Research Institute collaborators