PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 15754187

[Errors and risks in perioperative thrombolysis therapy].

Abstract

Until recently, perioperative thrombolysis has always been thought to be a contraindication, because of the risk of bleeding complications. However, many case reports now show that thrombolytic drugs can be successfully used in the perioperative period. Possible indications for perioperative thrombolysis are massive pulmonary embolism and cardiopulmonary resuscitation which are also important causes of cardiac arrest. Thrombolysis can be the decisive therapeutical option, e.g. when normal cardiopulmonary resuscitation measures are not successful. Nevertheless, even against the background of many positive case reports the indication for perioperative thrombolysis should be a case-specific decision as the frequency of complications depends on the surgical intervention and must be weighed against the possible benefits of early thrombolysis. For perioperative thrombolysis there are no data available showing a beneficial effect of one particular therapeutic regimen. In the literature it is suggested that thrombolysis should be performed as quickly as possible, because the risk of bleeding complications depends more on the duration of thrombolysis than on the dosage or the thrombolytic drug itself.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

F Spöhr, B W Böttiger, A Walther. 2005. [Errors and risks in perioperative thrombolysis therapy].. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00101-005-0828-z

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Comparison of ventilation and chest compression performance by bystanders using the Impact Model 730 ventilator and a conventional bag valve with mask in a model of adult cardiopulmonary arrest.

"Bystanders" or lay persons are typically the first caregivers to attend to a victim of out-of-hospital cardiopulmonary arrest. Astronaut crew medical officers (CMO) play a similar role to bystanders aboard the International Space Station (ISS). Studies have demonstrated the importance of bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (BCPR) for patient survival before the arrival of emergency medical care. Recent apprehension from bystanders about the threat of contracting communicable diseases during BCPR, however, has led to the consideration of other ventilation systems such as the bag-valve mask (BVM) and automatic transport ventilators (ATV). BVM use is called for during CPR aboard the ISS. This study evaluated the ventilation and compression performance of 40 basic CPR-trained bystanders using either a BVM (adult-sized self-inflating bag with face mask) or an ATV (Model 730 ventilator (M730), Impact Instrumentation, Inc., West Caldwell, NJ). Each two-bystander team gave BCPR to a simulated cardiopulmonary arrest victim using the 2-breath/15-compression cycle for 4 min and then switched roles for another 4-min interval. Compared to BVM use, the M730 led to significantly (p<0.05) lower number of breaths, smaller tidal volumes, airway flows, airway pressures, volume of gas entering the stomach per breath and chest compressions for the 4-min period. The M730 also enabled a bystander to meet the recommendation of 4-breath and compression cycles per minute as per Guidelines 2000. Lastly, ease-of-use scores were significantly higher for the M730 compared to the BVM. Overall, the data suggest that the M730 improves the quality of performance for a bystander performing BCPR.

Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation↗