During a 14 month period autopsies were performed on 107 patients with coronary heart disease and the results were evaluated prospectively with special reference to right ventricular infarction. A total of 214 regional infarcts were found, 107 (50%) of which involved the right ventricle. Right ventricular infarction was found in 90 hearts (84%), but only three isolated right ventricular infarcts were seen. Right ventricular involvement was found with equal frequency in anterior and posterior infarction (64 versus 66%), but posterior right ventricular infarcts were much larger (15% of the right ventricle was infarcted versus 1%). Proximal right coronary artery occlusion caused larger right ventricular infarction than did distal occlusion (15 versus 5 g). Right ventricular infarct size was not influenced by coronary artery disease (evaluated angiographically) in noninfarct-related vessels. Anterior right ventricular infarcts were predominantly located near the apex of the heart (to the left of the sternum), whereas posterior right ventricular infarcts were located near the atrioventricular groove (along the right sternal border). Infarct size was equal in patients who died from a first acute anterior or posterior infarct. However, posterior infarcts had more right ventricular involvement (28% of total infarct size versus 7% in anterior infarcts) leaving more of the left ventricular myocardium intact (79 versus 64%). These differences in infarct topography may explain why right ventricular involvement seldom is diagnosed clinically in patients with anterior infarction, and why left ventricular function and prognosis usually are better after posterior compared with anterior infarcts of enzymatically equal size.
Use of intra- and postoperative inotropes was associated with increased mortality and major postoperative morbidity.
Objectives In the Fluid and Catheter Treatment Trial (FACTT) of the National Institutes of Health Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Network, a conservative fluid protocol (FACTT Conservative) resulted in a lower cumulative fluid balance and better outcomes than a liberal fluid protocol (FACTT Liberal). Subsequent Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Network studies used a simplified conservative fluid protocol (FACTT Lite). The objective of this study was to compare the performance of FACTT Lite, FACTT Conservative, and FACTT Liberal protocols. Design Retrospective comparison of FACTT Lite, FACTT Conservative, and FACTT Liberal. Primary outcome was cumulative fluid balance over 7 days. Secondary outcomes were 60-day adjusted mortality and ventilator-free days through day 28. Safety outcomes were prevalence of acute kidney injury and new shock. Setting ICUs of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Network participating hospitals. Patients Five hundred three subjects managed with FACTT Conservative, 497 subjects managed with FACTT Liberal, and 1,124 subjects managed with FACTT Lite. Interventions Fluid management by protocol. Measurements and Main Results Cumulative fluid balance was 1,918 ± 323 mL in FACTT Lite, −136 ±491 mL in FACTT Conservative, and 6,992 ± 502 mL in FACTT Liberal (p < 0.001). Mortality was not different between groups (24% in FACTT Lite, 25% in FACTT Conservative and Liberal, p = 0.84). Ventilator-free days in FACTT Lite (14.9 ±0.3) were equivalent to FACTT Conservative (14.6±0.5) (p = 0.61) and greater than in FACTT Liberal (12.1 ±0.5, p < 0.001 vs Lite). Acute kidney injury prevalence was 58% in FACTT Lite and 57% in FACTT Conservative (p = 0.72). Prevalence of new shock in FACTT Lite (9%) was lower than in FACTT Conservative (13%) (p = 0.007 vs Lite) and similar to FACTT Liberal (11%) (p = 0.18 vs Lite). Conclusions FACTT Lite had a greater cumulative fluid balance than FACTT Conservative but had equivalent clinical and safety outcomes. FACTT Lite is an alternative to FACTT Conservative for fluid management in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.