Showing 2 results for Patil
Madhusudana Hn, Akriti Kashyap, Sunita Patil, Gurpuneet Basra, Navnath Dighe, Sashindran Vk,
Volume 16, Issue 3 (May-Jun 2022)
Abstract
Background and objectives: Intraoperative blood transfusion is a common medical intervention worldwide. Although mostly lifesaving when indicated, inappropriate administration of intraoperative can be potentially life-threatening. The aim of this study was to analyze the most common surgery/invasive procedures requiring intraoperative transfusion and to determine indications for intraoperative transfusion as well as the outcome of the patients after intraoperative transfusion.
Methods: A retrospective review of the electronic database of medical records was done for surgical patients who received intraoperative transfusion from June 2019 to December 2019. Preoperative hemoglobin values, associated comorbidities, and physiological triggers including hypotension and tachycardia were recorded. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the data.
Results: A total of 36 patients (age range: 9-80 years) were studied. Orthopedic surgeries (53%) were the most common surgeries that required intraoperative transfusion. Preoperative anemia (hemoglobin <10 g/dl) was the predominant reason for intraoperative transfusion. Type 2 diabetes mellitus (36.3%) was the most frequent comorbidity among the cases of intraoperative transfusion. Half the cases received two units of packed red blood cell (pRBC), while 39% of the cases received one unit of pRBC. The remaining 11.1% received more than two units of pRBC. Furthermore, 77.7% of the patients were discharged to home within a week, while 16.6% of the patients were discharged after a prolonged hospital stay (> one week). The remaining 5.5% died in the hospital within a week of the procedure/surgery.
Conclusion: Transfusion practices vary among physicians, hospitals, and countries. The findings highlight that the hospital might be the most important determinant of the number of administered transfusions, with some adopting programs to reduce transfusions for elective surgery.
Muragendraswami Astagimath, Suman Doddamani, Vishwanath Patil, Raviraja Aryapu,
Volume 16, Issue 6 (Special issue (Nov-Dec) 2022)
Abstract
Background and objectives: Pandemics have serious adverse impacts on public health, economy, social structure, and overall growth and development of a nation. Such impacts can be mitigated by timely introduction of effective vaccination programs. This was successfully achieved in India. This study was performed to compare the anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) immunoglobulin G (IgG) responses after first and second dose of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination.
Methods: This cross-sectional study included 60 people who were vaccinated with the AstraZeneca vaccine at Karnataka Institute of Medical Sciences, Hubballi, India. The subjects were divided into two groups. Group I included 30 people who had received a single dose of the vaccine, and group II included 30 people who had received two doses of the vaccine. Exclusion criteria included having a history of influenza like illness/severe acute respiratory infection/proven COVID-19 infection in past 6 months. The antibody response was measured by the Anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG test using the VITROS Anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG Reagent Pack.
Results: We observed that 97% of the subjects had reactive IgG antibodies after receiving two doses of the vaccine, whereas only 83% of the subjects developed antibodies after a single dose of the vaccine. A positive correlation was observed between the development of reactive antibodies and the duration between the first dose and the second dose (r=0.24).
Conclusion: Based on the results, the two-dose vaccination with the AstraZeneca vaccine is beneficial over the single-dose vaccination for protection against COVID-19. Moreover, increasing the duration between doses might improve the antibody response.
