Logo do repositório

Percorrer por autor "Pereira, E"

A mostrar 1 - 2 de 2
  • Comparing two pharmacological stress tests: adenosine vs ATP infusion – patient’s tolerance and image quality
    Publication . Santos, A; Geão, A; Mota, A; Pereira, E; Dias, L; Delgado, P; Figueiredo, S; Jerónimo, V
    Aim: Adenosine and Adenosine Triphosphate (ATP) are vasodilator agents that are used for pharmacologic stress testing in Myocardial Perfusion Imaging (MPI). Both pharmaceuticals may cause side-effects that are similarly described in the literature. Although, the half-life of these molecules are slightly different and patient’s tolerance might be different. These molecules have also been associated to an increase in the sub diaphragmatic tracer uptake that may reduce image quality, interfering with image interpretation. The aim of this study was to compare pharmacologic stress tests induced by adenosine infusion and by ATP infusion in terms of side-effects referred by patients and the corresponding image quality. Materials & Methods: Two hundred and forty eight (248) patients that underwent MPI were divided in two groups: Group 1 – Adenosine infusion (n=157); Group 3 – ATP infusion (n=91). Each group was further divided according to the presence or absence of side effects, their number and the need to administer pharmacological therapy to control symptoms: A- No side-effects; B - One side-effect; C – Two side-effects; D – Three or more side-effects and/or pharmacologic therapy needed. Image quality was evaluated according to the requirement of a new stress acquisition due to extra-cardiac activity that interfered with image quality and interpretation. Microsoft ExcelTM and SPSSTM were used in this analysis. We also correlated the two populations (Adenosine and ATP) according to the risk factors for cardiac events and the MPI result (normal or pathologic), in order to ensure that uniformity between both groups. Results: The most common effects were facial flushing, abdominal/throat pressure and discomfort in the arms. (See Table 1). Conclusions: The group with the highest percentage of no side-effects and the smaller percentage of three or more side-effects was group 2. However, in spite of the higher percentage of one side effect for group 2 (group 2=38% vs group 1=34%), the difference between them is not statistically significant (p=0,065), so we can assume that both groups had the same percentage of only one side-effect. Additionally, this group had less acquisition repetition, if compared to group 1 (acquisitions repeated: group 1=19,9%, group 2= 9,9%, p= 0,001). So, the group that had better results in terms of patient’s tolerance and image quality was group 2 – ATP infusion.
    2011Documento de conferência Acesso aberto Ver mais
  • A report on a survey among Portuguese Association of Interventional Cardiology associates regarding ionizing radiation protection practices in national interventional cath-labs
    Publication . Costa, H; Vinhas, H; Calé, R; Pereira, E; Santos, J; Paulo, G; Jorge, E; Brochado, B; Melica, B; Baptista Gonçalves, R; Infante de Oliveira, E
    Introduction and objectives: Concerns surrounding the consequences of ionizing radiation (IR) have increased in interventional cardiology (IC). Despite this, the ever-growing complexity of diseases as well as procedures can lead to greater exposure to radiation. The aim of this survey, led by Portuguese Association of Interventional Cardiology (APIC), was to evaluate the level of awareness and current practices on IR protection among its members. Methods: An online survey was emailed to all APIC members, between August and November 2021. The questionnaire consisted of 50 questions focusing on knowledge and measures of IR protection in the catheterization laboratory. Results were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Results: From a response rate of 46.9%, the study obtained a total sample of 159 responses (156 selected for analysis). Most survey respondents (66.0%) were unaware of the radiation exposure category, and only 60.4% reported systematically using a dosimeter. A large majority (90.4%) employed techniques to minimize exposure to radiation. All participants used personal protective equipment, despite eyewear protection only being used frequently by 49.2% of main operators. Ceiling suspended shields and table protectors were often used. Only two-thirds were familiar with the legally established limit on radiation doses for workers or the dose that should trigger patient follow-up. Most of the survey respondents had a non-certified training in IR procedures and only 32.0% had attended their yearly occupational health consultation. Conclusions: Safety methods and protective equipment are largely adopted among interventional cardiologists, who have shown some IR awareness. Despite this, there is room for improvement, especially concerning the use of eyewear protection, monitoring, and certification. Keywords: Cardiologia de intervenção; Dosimeter; Dosímetro; Equipamentos de proteção; Intervention cardiology; Ionizing radiation; Limites de dose; Protective equipment; Radiação ionizante; Safety methods; Técnicas de minimização.
    2023Artigo científico Acesso aberto Ver mais