Cardiac amyloidosis (CA) is a rare systemic disease determined by the extracellular deposition of amyloid protein in the heart. The protein can accumulate in any part of the heart: myocardium, vessels, endocardium, valves, epicardium and parietal pericardium. The types of CA include the following types: light chain (AL), amyloidosis AA (Amyloid A) and transthyretin (ATTR). The detection of specific subtypes remains of great importance to implement the targeted treatment. We present the case of a 65-year-old woman, who was admitted with severe deterioration of exercise capacity, a bilateral reduction of physiological vesicular murmur, ascites and edema of lower extremities. CA was suspected due to echocardiographic examination results, which led to further examination and final diagnosis. The aim of this study is to improve the disease awareness among clinicians and shorten the delay between the first symptoms and the diagnosis establishment resulting in a better outcome.
Background During the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, personal protective equipment (PPE) is used during medical resuscitation aerosol-generating procedures (AGP). This simulation study aimed to evaluate the effects of PPE on the performance of emergency resuscitation by medical students from the University of Silesia, Katowice, Poland and non-medical personnel, and used a quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation (Q-CPR) medical manikin. Material/Methods A simulation study was conducted using the Resusci Anne quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation (Q-CPR) medical manikin (Laerdal Medical AS, Norway). Participants were divided into 2 groups: a medical group of 50 and a non-medical group of 52, matched in pairs. Each pair performed 10 min of manual CPR with a compression-ventilation ratio of 30: 2 wearing PPE for AGP. The reference method was manual CPR wearing casual clothes along with surgical masks and latex gloves. Data about compression and ventilation were gathered using the QCPR Training application from Laerdal Medical. Results Data analyses indicated statistically significant differences between medical students using PPE for AGP and basic protection: average rate of chest compressions (123 vs 114 per min; P =0.004), chest recoil (69 vs 93; P =0.0050, correct depth of chest compressions (86.5 vs 97; P =0.0081), quality of ventilation (85 vs 89; P =0.0041). Among non-medical personnel however, a statistically significant difference was in the quality of ventilation (69–85.5; P =0.0032). Conclusions The findings from this study showed that the use of PPE for AGP during CPR was associated with slower average speed of chest compressions, less chest recoil, incorrect depth of chest compressions, and lower quality of ventilation.
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.