Did you mean: pulmonologists
-
American Journal of Critical Care : An... Jan 2024Managing sepsis and fluid resuscitation in patients with chronic kidney disease or end-stage renal disease is challenging for health care providers. Nurses are essential...
Managing sepsis and fluid resuscitation in patients with chronic kidney disease or end-stage renal disease is challenging for health care providers. Nurses are essential for early identification and treatment of these patients. Nurse education on assessing perfusion and implementing 3-hour bundled care can improve mortality rates in patients with sepsis. In this scoping review, initial screening identified 1176 articles published from 2015 through 2023 in the National Library of Medicine database; 29 articles were included in the literature summary and evidence synthesis. A systematic review meta-analysis was not possible because of data heterogeneity. The review revealed that most patients with chronic kidney disease or end-stage renal disease received more conservative resuscitation than did the general population, most likely because of concerns about volume overload. However, patients with chronic kidney disease or end-stage renal disease could tolerate the standard initial fluid resuscitation bolus of 30 mL/kg for sepsis. Outcomes in patients with chronic kidney disease or end-stage renal disease were similar to outcomes in patients without those conditions, whether they received standard or conservative fluid resuscitation. Patients who received the standard (higher) fluid resuscitation volume did not have increased rates of complications such as longer duration of mechanical ventilation, increased mortality, or prolonged length of stay. Using fluid responsiveness to guide resuscitation was associated with improved outcomes. The standard initial fluid resuscitation bolus of 30 mL/kg may be safe for patients with chronic kidney disease or end-stage renal disease and sepsis. Fluid responsiveness could be a valuable resuscitation criterion, promoting better decision-making by multidisciplinary teams. Further research is required.
Topics: Humans; Sepsis; Kidney Failure, Chronic; Fluid Therapy; Resuscitation; Respiration, Artificial
PubMed: 38161173
DOI: 10.4037/ajcc2024756 -
Annals of Medicine Dec 2023The coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) increased the already heavy workload in the pulmonary and respiratory departments, which therefore possibly increased the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
The coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) increased the already heavy workload in the pulmonary and respiratory departments, which therefore possibly increased the prevalence of burnout among pulmonologists or respiratory therapists. We aimed to compare the differences in burnout among pulmonologists or respiratory therapists pre- and post-COVID-19 by doing a systematic review with meta-analysis.
METHODS
We searched pulmonologist, or pulmonary, or respiratory, and burnout up to 29 January 2023 in six databases. We included studies investigating pulmonologists or respiratory therapists and reporting the prevalence of burnout among them. The risk of bias was assessed by a tool for prevalence studies. The overall prevalence of burnout was pooled.
RESULTS
A total of 2859 records were identified and 16 studies were included in the final analysis. The included studies reported 3610 responding individuals and 2336 burnouts. The pooled prevalence of burnout was 61.7% (95% confidence interval (CI), 48.6-73.2%; = 96.3%). The pooled prevalence of burnout during COVID-19 was significantly higher than it was prior to the outbreak (68.4% vs. 41.6%, = .01). The result of the meta-regression revealed that COVID-19 coverage was significantly associated with the prevalence of burnout ( = .04).
CONCLUSIONS
Burnout was widely prevalent among pulmonologists or respiratory therapists and increasingly perceived during COVID-19. Therefore, interventions were needed to reduce burnout in this specialty.KEY MESSASGESThe coronavirus disease-19 increased the already heavy workload in the pulmonary and respiratory departments.Burnout was widely prevalent among pulmonologists or respiratory therapists and increasingly perceived during COVID-19.
Topics: Humans; COVID-19; Pulmonologists; Prevalence; Burnout, Professional; Burnout, Psychological
PubMed: 37459584
DOI: 10.1080/07853890.2023.2234392 -
Journal of Bronchology & Interventional... Jan 2024
Topics: Humans; Rhinosporidiosis; Bronchoscopy; Bronchi
PubMed: 37280739
DOI: 10.1097/LBR.0000000000000927 -
Annals of the American Thoracic Society Jun 2023Transbronchial lung biopsies (TBLBs) are commonly performed by pulmonologists. Most providers consider pulmonary hypertension to be at least a relative contraindication... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Transbronchial lung biopsies (TBLBs) are commonly performed by pulmonologists. Most providers consider pulmonary hypertension to be at least a relative contraindication to TBLB. This practice is based primarily on expert opinion, as there are very few patient outcomes data backing it. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of previously published studies to determine the safety of TBLB in patients with pulmonary hypertension. The MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases were searched for pertinent studies. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Meta-analysis was performed using MedCalc version 20.118 to calculate the weighted pooled relative risk of complications in patients with pulmonary hypertension. Nine studies with a total of 1,699 patients were included in the meta-analysis. On the basis of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, the risk of bias was low in the included studies. The overall weighted relative risk of bleeding with TBLB in patients with pulmonary hypertension was 1.01 (95% confidence interval, 0.71-1.45) compared with patients without pulmonary hypertension. Heterogeneity was low; therefore, the fixed-effects model was used. In a subgroup analysis of three studies, the overall weighted relative risk of significant hypoxia in patients with pulmonary hypertension was 2.06 (95% confidence interval, 1.12-3.76). Our results show that the patients with pulmonary hypertension do not have a significantly elevated risk of bleeding with TBLB compared with control subjects. We hypothesize that significant postbiopsy bleeding might be preferentially originating from bronchial artery circulation as opposed to pulmonary artery circulation, much like episodes of massive spontaneous hemoptysis. This hypothesis can explain our results, as in this scenario, elevated pulmonary arterial pressure would not be expected to have a bearing on the risk of post-TBLB bleeding. Most of the studies in our analysis included patients with mild to moderate pulmonary hypertension and it is not clear if our results can be extrapolated to patients with severe pulmonary hypertension. We noted that the patients with pulmonary hypertension were at a higher risk of developing hypoxia and needing a longer duration of mechanical ventilation with TBLB compared with control subjects. Further studies are needed to better understand the origin and pathophysiology of post-TBLB bleeding.
Topics: Humans; Hypertension, Pulmonary; Bronchoscopy; Biopsy; Lung Diseases; Hypoxia; Lung
PubMed: 36867520
DOI: 10.1513/AnnalsATS.202211-965OC -
Journal of Clinical Medicine Nov 2022Pulmonary endarterectomy (PEA) is the treatment of choice in case of chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH). PEA is performed by an increasing number of... (Review)
Review
Pulmonary endarterectomy (PEA) is the treatment of choice in case of chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH). PEA is performed by an increasing number of surgeons; however, the reported outcomes are limited to a few registries or to individual centers' experiences. This systematic review focuses on pre-operative evaluation, intra-operative procedure and post-operative results in patients submitted to PEA for CTEPH. The literature included was searched using a formal strategy, combining the terms "pulmonary endarterectomy" AND "chronic pulmonary hypertension" and focusing on studies published in the last 5 years (2017-2022) to give a comprehensive overview on the most updated literature. The selection of the adequate surgical candidate is a crucial point, and the decision should always be performed by expert multidisciplinary teams composed of surgeons, pulmonologists and radiologists. In all the included studies, the surgical procedure was performed through a median sternotomy with intermittent deep hypothermic circulatory arrest under cardiopulmonary bypass. In case of residual pulmonary hypertension, alternative combined treatments should be considered (balloon angioplasty and/or medical therapy until lung transplantation in highly selected cases). Short- and long-term outcomes, although not homogenous across the different studies, are acceptable in highly experienced CTEPH centers.
PubMed: 36498551
DOI: 10.3390/jcm11236976 -
The Indian Journal of Tuberculosis 2022With the increasing number of the elderly population, the number of people with respiratory diseases along with other comorbidities is also increasing. With the good... (Review)
Review
With the increasing number of the elderly population, the number of people with respiratory diseases along with other comorbidities is also increasing. With the good number of available evidence, the use of interventional pulmonary procedures is also increasing. However, the studies on the safety and therapeutic benefit of these procedures in the elderly population are limited. Because of the paucity of data, we decided to do a systematic review of the scientific literature that is currently available, to boost confidence to do these procedures by clinicians. This review deals with the procedures that are commonly performed in elderly respiratory patients, their indications, safety and the diagnostic and therapeutic yield, and compares them with the results in the younger population. It also focuses on the safety of anaesthetic techniques used for these procedures in the elderly. The bottom line of this review is that there is no significant difference between the older and younger age groups with regard to the above parameters and that age alone is not a criterion to decide whether the patients may undergo interventional pulmonary procedures.
Topics: Aged; Humans; Pulmonary Medicine; Tuberculosis; Lung; Comorbidity
PubMed: 36400519
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijtb.2022.10.014 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2022Systemic corticosteroids are used to treat people with COVID-19 because they counter hyper-inflammation. Existing evidence syntheses suggest a slight benefit on... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Systemic corticosteroids are used to treat people with COVID-19 because they counter hyper-inflammation. Existing evidence syntheses suggest a slight benefit on mortality. Nonetheless, size of effect, optimal therapy regimen, and selection of patients who are likely to benefit most are factors that remain to be evaluated.
OBJECTIVES
To assess whether and at which doses systemic corticosteroids are effective and safe in the treatment of people with COVID-19, to explore equity-related aspects in subgroup analyses, and to keep up to date with the evolving evidence base using a living systematic review approach.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register (which includes PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP, and medRxiv), Web of Science (Science Citation Index, Emerging Citation Index), and the WHO COVID-19 Global literature on coronavirus disease to identify completed and ongoing studies to 6 January 2022.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated systemic corticosteroids for people with COVID-19. We included any type or dose of systemic corticosteroids and the following comparisons: systemic corticosteroids plus standard care versus standard care, different types, doses and timings (early versus late) of corticosteroids. We excluded corticosteroids in combination with other active substances versus standard care, topical or inhaled corticosteroids, and corticosteroids for long-COVID treatment.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We followed standard Cochrane methodology. To assess the risk of bias in included studies, we used the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' 2 tool for RCTs. We rated the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach for the following outcomes: all-cause mortality up to 30 and 120 days, discharged alive (clinical improvement), new need for invasive mechanical ventilation or death (clinical worsening), serious adverse events, adverse events, hospital-acquired infections, and invasive fungal infections.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 16 RCTs in 9549 participants, of whom 8271 (87%) originated from high-income countries. A total of 4532 participants were randomised to corticosteroid arms and the majority received dexamethasone (n = 3766). These studies included participants mostly older than 50 years and male. We also identified 42 ongoing and 23 completed studies lacking published results or relevant information on the study design. Hospitalised individuals with a confirmed or suspected diagnosis of symptomatic COVID-19 Systemic corticosteroids plus standard care versus standard care plus/minus placebo We included 11 RCTs (8019 participants), one of which did not report any of our pre-specified outcomes and thus our analyses included outcome data from 10 studies. Systemic corticosteroids plus standard care compared to standard care probably reduce all-cause mortality (up to 30 days) slightly (risk ratio (RR) 0.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84 to 0.97; 7898 participants; estimated absolute effect: 274 deaths per 1000 people not receiving systemic corticosteroids compared to 246 deaths per 1000 people receiving the intervention (95% CI 230 to 265 per 1000 people); moderate-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect on all-cause mortality (up to 120 days) (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.23 to 2.34; 485 participants). The chance of clinical improvement (discharged alive at day 28) may slightly increase (RR 1.07, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.11; 6786 participants; low-certainty evidence) while the risk of clinical worsening (new need for invasive mechanical ventilation or death) may slightly decrease (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.01; 5586 participants; low-certainty evidence). For serious adverse events (two RCTs, 678 participants), adverse events (three RCTs, 447 participants), hospital-acquired infections (four RCTs, 598 participants), and invasive fungal infections (one study, 64 participants), we did not perform any analyses beyond the presentation of descriptive statistics due to very low-certainty evidence (high risk of bias, heterogeneous definitions, and underreporting). Different types, dosages or timing of systemic corticosteroids We identified one RCT (86 participants) comparing methylprednisolone to dexamethasone, thus the evidence is very uncertain about the effect of methylprednisolone on all-cause mortality (up to 30 days) (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.07; 86 participants). None of the other outcomes of interest were reported in this study. We included four RCTs (1383 participants) comparing high-dose dexamethasone (12 mg or higher) to low-dose dexamethasone (6 mg to 8 mg). High-dose dexamethasone compared to low-dose dexamethasone may reduce all-cause mortality (up to 30 days) (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.04; 1269 participants; low-certainty evidence), but the evidence is very uncertain about the effect of high-dose dexamethasone on all-cause mortality (up to 120 days) (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.08; 1383 participants) and it may have little or no impact on clinical improvement (discharged alive at 28 days) (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.09; 200 participants; low-certainty evidence). Studies did not report data on clinical worsening (new need for invasive mechanical ventilation or death). For serious adverse events, adverse events, hospital-acquired infections, and invasive fungal infections, we did not perform analyses beyond the presentation of descriptive statistics due to very low-certainty evidence. We could not identify studies for comparisons of different timing and systemic corticosteroids versus other active substances. Equity-related subgroup analyses We conducted the following subgroup analyses to explore equity-related factors: sex, age (< 70 years; ≥ 70 years), ethnicity (Black, Asian or other versus White versus unknown) and place of residence (high-income versus low- and middle-income countries). Except for age and ethnicity, no evidence for differences could be identified. For all-cause mortality up to 30 days, participants younger than 70 years seemed to benefit from systemic corticosteroids in comparison to those aged 70 years and older. The few participants from a Black, Asian, or other minority ethnic group showed a larger estimated effect than the many White participants. Outpatients with asymptomatic or mild disease There are no studies published in populations with asymptomatic infection or mild disease.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Systemic corticosteroids probably slightly reduce all-cause mortality up to 30 days in people hospitalised because of symptomatic COVID-19, while the evidence is very uncertain about the effect on all-cause mortality up to 120 days. For younger people (under 70 years of age) there was a potential advantage, as well as for Black, Asian, or people of a minority ethnic group; further subgroup analyses showed no relevant effects. Evidence related to the most effective type, dose, or timing of systemic corticosteroids remains immature. Currently, there is no evidence on asymptomatic or mild disease (non-hospitalised participants). Due to the low to very low certainty of the current evidence, we cannot assess safety adequately to rule out harmful effects of the treatment, therefore there is an urgent need for good-quality safety data. Findings of equity-related subgroup analyses should be interpreted with caution because of their explorative nature, low precision, and missing data. We identified 42 ongoing and 23 completed studies lacking published results or relevant information on the study design, suggesting there may be possible changes of the effect estimates and certainty of the evidence in the future.
Topics: Humans; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Methylprednisolone; Dexamethasone; Invasive Fungal Infections; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; COVID-19 Drug Treatment; Post-Acute COVID-19 Syndrome
PubMed: 36385229
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD014963.pub2 -
Journal of Hospital Medicine Aug 2022Bedside procedure services are increasingly employed within internal medicine departments to meet clinical needs and improve trainee education. Published literature on... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Bedside procedure services are increasingly employed within internal medicine departments to meet clinical needs and improve trainee education. Published literature on these largely comprises single-center studies; an updated systematic review is needed to synthesize available data.
PURPOSE
This review examined published literature on the structure and function of bedside procedure services and their impact on clinical and educational outcomes (PROSPERO ID: 192466).
DATA SOURCES
Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses framework, multiple databases were searched for publications from 2000 to 2021.
STUDY SELECTION, DATA EXTRACTION, AND DATA SYNTHESIS
Thirteen single-center studies were identified, including 12 observational studies and 1 randomized trial. Data were synthesized in tabular and narrative format. Services were typically staffed by hospitalists or pulmonologists. At a minimum, each offered paracentesis, thoracentesis, and lumbar puncture. While there was considerable heterogeneity in service structures, these broadly fit either Model A (service performing the procedure) or Model B (service supervising the primary team). Procedure services led to increases in procedure volumes and self-efficacy among medical residents. Assessment of clinical outcomes was limited by heterogeneous definitions of complication rates and by sparse head-to-head data involving suitable comparators. Published data pointed to high success rates, low complication rates, and high patient satisfaction, with a recent study also demonstrating a decreased length of stay.
CONCLUSIONS
There are relatively few published studies describing the characteristics of bedside procedure services and their impact on clinical and educational outcomes. Limited data point to considerable heterogeneity in service design, a positive impact on medical trainees, and a positive impact on patient-related outcomes.
Topics: Hospitalists; Humans; Internal Medicine; Paracentesis; Spinal Puncture; Thoracentesis; United States
PubMed: 35662415
DOI: 10.1002/jhm.12848 -
European Respiratory Review : An... Mar 2022Imaging represents an important noninvasive means to assess cystic fibrosis (CF) lung disease, which remains the main cause of morbidity and mortality in CF patients.... (Review)
Review
State-of-the-art review of lung imaging in cystic fibrosis with recommendations for pulmonologists and radiologists from the "iMAging managEment of cySTic fibROsis" (MAESTRO) consortium.
OBJECTIVE
Imaging represents an important noninvasive means to assess cystic fibrosis (CF) lung disease, which remains the main cause of morbidity and mortality in CF patients. While the development of new imaging techniques has revolutionised clinical practice, advances have posed diagnostic and monitoring challenges. The authors aim to summarise these challenges and make evidence-based recommendations regarding imaging assessment for both clinicians and radiologists.
STUDY DESIGN
A committee of 21 experts in CF from the 10 largest specialist centres in Italy was convened, including a radiologist and a pulmonologist from each centre, with the overall aim of developing clear and actionable recommendations for lung imaging in CF. An threshold of at least 80% of the votes was required for acceptance of each statement of recommendation.
RESULTS
After a systematic review of the relevant literature, the committee convened to evaluate 167 articles. Following five RAND conferences, consensus statements were developed by an executive subcommittee. The entire consensus committee voted and approved 28 main statements.
CONCLUSIONS
There is a need for international guidelines regarding the appropriate timing and selection of imaging modality for patients with CF lung disease; timing and selection depends upon the clinical scenario, the patient's age, lung function and type of treatment. Despite its ubiquity, the use of the chest radiograph remains controversial. Both computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging should be routinely used to monitor CF lung disease. Future studies should focus on imaging protocol harmonisation both for computed tomography and for magnetic resonance imaging. The introduction of artificial intelligence imaging analysis may further revolutionise clinical practice by providing fast and reliable quantitative outcomes to assess disease status. To date, there is no evidence supporting the use of lung ultrasound to monitor CF lung disease.
Topics: Artificial Intelligence; Consensus Development Conferences as Topic; Cystic Fibrosis; Humans; Magnetic Resonance Imaging; Pulmonologists; Radiologists; Tomography, X-Ray Computed
PubMed: 35321929
DOI: 10.1183/16000617.0173-2021 -
International Forum of Allergy &... Sep 2022Cystic fibrosis (CF) is a multisystem disease that often requires otolaryngology care. Individuals with CF commonly have chronic rhinosinusitis but also present with...
BACKGROUND
Cystic fibrosis (CF) is a multisystem disease that often requires otolaryngology care. Individuals with CF commonly have chronic rhinosinusitis but also present with hearing loss and dysphonia. Given these manifestations of CF, otolaryngologists are frequently involved in the care of patients with CF; however, there is limited consensus on optimal management of sinonasal, otologic, and laryngologic symptoms.
METHODS
The Cystic Fibrosis Foundation convened a multidisciplinary team of otolaryngologists, pulmonologists, audiologists, pharmacists, a social worker, a nurse coordinator, a respiratory therapist, two adults with CF, and a caregiver of a child with CF to develop consensus recommendations. Workgroups developed draft recommendation statements based on a systematic literature review, and a ≥80% consensus was required for acceptance of each recommendation statement.
RESULTS
The committee voted on 25 statements. Eleven statements were adopted recommending a treatment or intervention, while five statements were formulated recommending against a specific treatment or intervention. The committee recommended eight statements as an option for select patients in certain circumstances, and one statement did not reach consensus.
CONCLUSION
These multidisciplinary consensus recommendations will help providers navigate decisions related to otolaryngology consultation, medical and surgical management of CF-CRS, hearing, and voice in individuals with CF. A collaborative and multidisciplinary approach is advocated to best care for our patients with CF. Future clinical research is needed utilizing standardized, validated outcomes with comprehensive reporting of patient outcome, effects of modulator therapies, and genetic characteristics to help continue to advance care, decrease morbidity, and improve the quality of life for individuals with CF.
Topics: Adult; Child; Consensus; Cystic Fibrosis; Humans; Otolaryngology; Quality of Life; Sinusitis
PubMed: 35089650
DOI: 10.1002/alr.22974