Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Permanent Implant (permanent + implant)
Selected AbstractsThe Novacor Left Ventricular Assist System: Clinical Experience from the Novacor RegistryJOURNAL OF CARDIAC SURGERY, Issue 4 2001F. Dagenais The electrically powered Novacor left ventricular assist (LVAS) system was first used clinically as a bridge to transplant in 1984. The configuration has evolved to the current wearable model used clinically for the first time in 1993. In 1998, the inflow conduit was modified, reducing embolic events by 50%. Over 1100 implants have been performed worldwide with cumulative support greater than 300 patient years, and only 0.7% requiring replacement. The Novacor is a safe and effective device for bridge to transplant, bridge to recovery, or potentially permanent implant with reliable long-term support for periods long as 4 years. [source] Sacral nerve stimulation for fecal incontinence and constipation in adults: A short version cochrane review,,NEUROUROLOGY AND URODYNAMICS, Issue 3 2008G. Mowatt Background Fecal incontinence and constipation are disabling conditions that reduce quality of life. If conservative treatment fails, one option is sacral nerve stimulation (SNS), a minimally invasive technique allowing modulation of the nerves and muscles of the pelvic floor and hindgut. Objectives To assess the effects of SNS for fecal incontinence and constipation in adults. Search strategy We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialized Trials Register (searched 24 April 2007) and the reference lists of relevant articles. Selection criteria All randomized or quasi-randomized trials assessing the effects of SNS for fecal incontinence or constipation in adults. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently screened the search results, assessed the methodological quality of the included studies, and undertook data extraction. Main results Three crossover studies were included. Two, enrolling 34 (Leroi) and two participants (Vaizey), assessed the effects of SNS for fecal incontinence, and one (Kenefick), enrolling two participants, assessed SNS for constipation. In the study by Leroi, following the crossover period, participants, while still blinded, chose the period of stimulation they had preferred. Outcomes at different time points were reported separately for 19 participants who preferred the "on" and five who preferred the "off" period. For the group of 19, the median (range) episodes of fecal incontinence per week fell from 1.7 (0,9) during the "off" period to 0.7 (0,5) during the "on" period; for the group of five, however, the median (range) rose from 1.7 (0,11) during the "off" period compared with 3.7 (0,11) during the "on" period. Vaizey reported an average of six, and one, episodes of fecal incontinence per week during the "off" and "on" periods, respectively. Leroi reported that four of 27 participants experienced an adverse event resulting in removal of the stimulator; Vaizey did not report adverse events. For SNS for constipation, during the "off" crossover period the participants experienced an average of two bowel movements per week, compared with five during the "on" period. Abdominal pain and bloating occurred 79% of the time during the "off" period compared with 33% during the "on" period. No adverse events occurred. Authors' conclusions The very limited evidence from the included studies suggests that SNS can improve continence in selected people with fecal incontinence, and reduce symptoms in selected people with constipation. However, temporary, percutaneous stimulation for a 2,3-week period does not always successfully identify those for whom a permanent implant will be beneficial. Larger, good quality randomized crossover trials are needed to allow the effects of SNS for these conditions to be assessed with more certainty. Neurourol. Urodynam. 27:155,161, 2008. © 2008 Wiley-Liss, Inc. [source] Spinal Cord Stimulation for Chronic Visceral Abdominal PainPAIN MEDICINE, Issue 3 2010Leonardo Kapural MD Abstract Background., Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) may reduce pain scores and improve function in patients with chronic visceral abdominal pain. We thus present our large clinical experience in SCS for visceral abdominal pain. Methods., We trialed spinal cord stimulation in 35 patients, each of whom was shown by retrograde differential epidural block to have either visceral pain (n = 32) or mixed visceral and central pain (n = 3). SCS trials lasted 4 to 14 days (median 9 days). SCS lead tips were mostly positioned at T5 (n = 11) or T6 (n = 10). Results., Thirty patients (86%) reported at least 50% pain relief upon completion of the trial. Among these, pretrial visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores averaged 8.2 ± 1.6 (SD) and opioid use averaged 110 ± 119 mg morphine sulfate equivalents. During the trial, VAS pain scores decreased to 3.1 ± 1.6 cm (P < 0.001, Mann,Whitney Rank Sum Test) and opioid use decreased to 70 ± 68 mg morphine equivalent a day (P = 0.212). Five patients failed the trial, one was lost to follow-up, and 19 were followed for the whole year. Seven patients were either followed for less than a year (n = 3) or the SCS system was removed due to infection or lead migration (n = 4). One patient despite the successful trial felt no improvements at 6 months after the implant and requested an explant of the SCS device. Among the 28 patients who received permanent implant, 19 were followed at least a year. Their VAS pain scores remained low (3.8 ± 1.9 cm; P < 0.001) at 1 year, as did opioid use (38 ± 48 mg morphine equivalents; P = 0.089). Conclusions., Spinal cord stimulation may be a useful therapeutic option for patients with severe visceral pain. [source] Sacral nerve stimulation for neurogenic faecal incontinenceBRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY (NOW INCLUDES EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY), Issue 6 2007B. Holzer Background: Sacral nerve stimulation (SNS) has emerged as a promising technique for the treatment of faecal incontinence. This study assessed the outcome of SNS in a cohort of patients with incontinence of neurological aetiology. Methods: Thirty-six patients were included in a trial of SNS. Twenty-nine subsequently had a permanent implant. Evaluation consisted of a continence diary, anal manometry, saline retention testing and quality of life assessment. Results: After a median follow-up of 35 (range 3,71) months, 28 patients showed a marked improvement in or complete recovery of continence. Incontinence to solid or liquid stool decreased from a median of 7 (range 4,15) to 2 (range 0,5) episodes in 21 days (P = 0·002). Saline retention time increased from a median of 2 (range 0,5) to 7 (range 2,15) min (P = 0·002). Maximum resting and squeeze anal canal pressures increased compared with preoperative values. Quality of life on all scales among patients who received a permanent implant increased at 12 and 24 months after operation. Conclusion: SNS is of value in selected patients with neurogenic faecal incontinence. Copyright © 2007 British Journal of Surgery Society Ltd. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [source] Spinal Cord Stimulation for Failed Back Surgery SyndromeNEUROMODULATION, Issue 1 2001Jean-Christophe Leveque BA Objective. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of modern spinal cord stimulation (SCS) for the treatment of failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS). Materials and Methods. Thirty patients were treated with SCS between December 1992 and January 1998 for low back and radicular pain after multiple failed back surgeries. Permanent systems were implanted if trial stimulation led to > 50% pain reduction. Median long-term follow-up was 34 months (range, 6,66 months). Severity of pain was determined postoperatively by a disinterested third party. Results. Overall, 12 of the 16 patients (75%) who received permanent implants continued to report at least 50% relief of pain at follow-up. All six patients who underwent placement of laminectomy-styled electrode for SCS in the thoracic region had > 50% pain relief at long-term follow-up. Visual analog scores decreased an average of 3.2 (from 8.6 preoperatively to 5.4 postoperatively). Patients undergoing SCS placement via laminectomy in the thoracic region experienced an average decrease of 4.9 in VAS, whereas those who underwent percutaneous placement of thoracic leads had an average decrease of 2.5. Conclusions. SCS is an effective treatment for chronic low back and lower extremity pain which is refractory to conservative therapy and which is not amenable to corrective anatomic surgery. Though our patient population is small, our results imply that the laminectomy-style electrodes in the thoracic region achieve better long-term effectiveness than percutaneous leads. [source] Provisional Implants: A Clinical Prospective Study in 45 Patients, from Implant Placement to Delivery of the Final BridgeCLINICAL IMPLANT DENTISTRY AND RELATED RESEARCH, Issue 3 2004Par-Olov Östman DDS ABSTRACT Background: Protocols for submerged healing of dental implants often require the patient to have no teeth until suture removal and to wear a removable prosthesis during the remaining healing period. This may be inconvenient for the patient, and healing may be influenced negatively by the removable prosthesis. Purpose: The aim of the present prospective clinical study was to evaluate the use of provisional implants (PIS) to provide patients with a provisional fixed bridge during the healing of permanent implants. Materials and Methods: Twenty female and 25 male patients were consecutively included in the study. The 45 patients were treated for either partial (16 patients) or total (29 patients) edentulism in the maxilla. The permanent implants were placed first; as many PIS as possible were then installed between the permanent implants. After suturing, impressions from which to manufacture provisional bridges (to be cemented to the PIS) were taken. The patients were monitored with clinical and radiographic follow-up from implant placement to delivery of the final prosthesis. Results: Five (2.2%) of the 230 permanent Brånemark System® implants (Nobel Biocare AB, Gothenburg, Sweden) did not integrate. None of the failures could be related to the presence of PIS between the permanent implants. Seven PIS failed during the observation period. In addition, 17 (9%) of the 192 PIS showed mobility at the second-stage surgery although they had supported the provisional bridges without clinical symptoms. Forty-four of 45 patients showed stabile PI bridges at the time of second-stage surgery. Conclusion: Based on our experiences we concluded that provisional implants can be successfully used to provide patients with a fixed provisional bridge during the healing of permanent implants. [source] | ||||||||||