Search Results
You are looking at 1 - 4 of 4 items for
- Author or Editor: B Antus x
- Refine by Access: All Content x
Introduction
Exhaled carbon monoxide (eCO) has been widely implicated as a pulmonary biomarker in respiratory diseases. The aim of this study was to investigate whether the treatment of patients with severe acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) could be aided by monitoring the changes in eCO.
Methods
The levels of eCO along with routine clinical parameters were analyzed in 29 current smoker and 33 ex-smoker COPD patients, first at the time of hospital admission, and again at discharge following the standard treatment. Patients with AECOPD were also stratified according to sputum bacteria.
Results
At exacerbation, the levels of eCO were increased in current smokers compared to ex-smokers (6.0 [2.0–9.5] versus 1.0 [1.0–2.0] ppm, p < 0.001). Similarly, eCO levels were higher in smokers after treatment (7.0 [2.0–12.5] versus 1.0 [1.0–2.0] ppm, p < 0.001). Treatment of AECOPD did not affect eCO concentrations. The levels of eCO were not statistically different between bacterial and non-bacterial AECOPD either. Investigating a subgroup of current smoker patients (n = 15), there was a significant correlation between the levels of eCO and blood carboxyhemoglobin concentrations both at exacerbation and discharge. No associations were found between eCO and lung function or blood gas parameters.
Conclusion
Our results suggest that monitoring eCO during the treatment of AECOPD is of limited clinical value.
Exercise-caused metabolic changes can be followed by monitoring exhaled volatiles; however it has not been previously reported if a spectrum of exhaled gases is modified after physical challenge. We have hypothesized that changes in volatile molecules assessed by an electronic nose may be the reason for the alkalization of the exhaled breath condensate (EBC) fluid following physical exercise.Ten healthy young subjects performed a 6-minute running test. Exhaled breath samples pre-exercise and post-exercise (0 min, 15 min, 30 min and 60 min) were collected for volatile pattern (“smellprint”) determination and pH measurements (at 5.33 kPa CO2), respectively. Exhaled breath smellprints were analyzed using principal component analysis and were related to EBC pH.Smellprints (p=0.04) and EBC pH (p=0.01) were altered during exercise challenge. Compared to pre-exercise values, smellprints and pH differed at 15 min, 30 min and 60 min following exercise (p<0.05), while no difference was found at 0 min post-exercise. In addition, a significant correlation was found between volatile pattern of exhaled breath and EBC pH (p=0.01, r=−0.34).Physical exercise changes the pattern of exhaled volatiles together with an increase in pH of breath. Changes in volatiles may be responsible for increase in EBC pH.
Abstract
Purpose
Our aims were to evaluate the primary and clinical evisceration indications and to analyse orbital implant related complications.
Materials/methods
We included in our retrospective review all eviscerations between 2006 and 2016 at the Department of Ophthalmology of Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary. Primary evisceration indications were classified into six groups: trauma, surgical diseases, infections or inflammations, systemic diseases, tumours and unclassifiable diseases. Clinical immediate evisceration indications were also classified into six groups: painful blind eye due to glaucoma, atrophia/phthisis bulbi, endophthalmitis, cosmetic reasons, acute trauma and expulsive bleeding.
Results
Evisceration was performed in 46 eyes of 46 patients (54.3% males, age 43.0 ± 18.6 years). The most common primary evisceration indications were trauma (37%), surgical diseases (34.8%), infection or inflammation (10.9%), systemic diseases (6.5%), tumours (8.7%) and unclassifiable diseases (2.2%). Painful blind eye due to glaucoma (34.8%) was the most common clinical indication for evisceration, followed by atrophia/phthisis bulbi (26.1%), endophthalmitis (17.4%), cosmetic reasons (13.0%), acute trauma (6.5%) and expulsive bleeding (2.2%). After evisceration, 91.3% of the patients received orbital implant and during 26.8±28.9 months follow-up implant related complications were found in 14.3% of the cases, including implant extrusion (4.8%), partial wound dehiscence (4.8%), implant exposure (2.4%) and orbital inflammation (2.4%).
Conclusion
Painful blind eye and atrophia/phthisis bulbi due to ocular trauma and surgical diseases represent the most common indications for ocular evisceration. If malignant intraocular tumours can be excluded, evisceration surgery combined with a silicon-based orbital implant is a safe and effective procedure.
