58 research outputs found
Corrigendum to Practices of Law Number 6292 and Evaluation of Lands Taken Out of Forest Boundary: The Case of Finike District Year 2020, Volume 22, Issue 1, 222 - 231, https://doi.org/10.24011/barofd.659281
No full textThe authors regret there was an error in the author line related to a forgotten author and the corrected author Line is provided below. Mohammad CHEHREH GHANI 1,*, Nimet VELİOĞLU 2 1İstanbul Üniversitesi, Orman Fakültesi, Orman Mühendisliği Bölümü, , İSTANBUL 2 *Sorumlu Yazar (Corresponding Author): İstanbul Üniversitesi, Orman Fakültesi, Orman Mühendisliği Bölümü, , İSTANBUL These changes would not affect the results and conclusion of the whole manuscript. The authors would like to apologize for any inconvenience caused.*The authors regret there was an error in the author line related to a forgotten author and the corrected author Line is provided below. Mohammad CHEHREH GHANI 1,*, Nimet VELİOĞLU 2 1İstanbul Üniversitesi, Orman Fakültesi, Orman Mühendisliği Bölümü, , İSTANBUL 2 *Sorumlu Yazar (Corresponding Author): İstanbul Üniversitesi, Orman Fakültesi, Orman Mühendisliği Bölümü, , İSTANBUL These changes would not affect the results and conclusion of the whole manuscript. The authors would like to apologize for any inconvenience caused
Sedation during noninvasive mechanical ventilation with dexmedetomidine or midazolam: A randomized, double-blind, prospective study
No full textAbstractBackground: Effective noninvasive mechanical ventilation (NIV) requires a patient to be comfortable and in synch with the ventilator, for which sedation is usually needed. Choice of the proper drug for sedation can lead to improved clinical outcomes.Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of dexmedetomidine and midazolam on sedation and their effects on hemodynamics and gas exchange.Methods: In this randomized, double-blind study, intensive care unit patients with acute respiratory failure due to acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease undergoing NIV were equally randomized to receive a loading dose of 1 μg/kg IV dexmedetomidine or 0.05 μg/kg midazolam over 10 minutes followed by a maintenance infusion of 0.5 μg/kg/h dexmedetomidine (group D) or 0.1 mg/kg/h midazolam (group M). The following parameters were measured by a blinded clinician at baseline and 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 24 hours after the loading dose was administered: Ramsay Sedation Score (RSS), Riker Sedation-Agitation Scale (RSAS), Bispectral Index (BIS), arterial blood gases, and vital signs. A second blinded investigator determined dosing changes according to the outcome of maintaining a target sedation level of RSS 2 to 3, RSAS 3 to 4, and BIS >85.Results: A total of 45 patients were assessed for enrollment in the study; 4 did not meet the inclusion criteria and 1 refused to participate (men/women 19/21; mean age 58/60; all patients were receiving bronchodilators, steroids, antibiotics, and mucolytics). In both groups (n = 20), RSS significantly increased and RSAS levels and BIS values significantly decreased after the loading dose, compared with baseline (P < 0.05). RSS levels were significantly lower beginning at 4 hours in group D compared with group M (P < 0.05). RSAS levels were not significantly different between the 2 groups in the first 8 hours. However, RSAS levels were significantly higher at 8 hours after the loading dose was administered in group D compared with group M (P < 0.01). BIS was significantly higher in group D throughout the study period (P < 0.05). Respiratory rates and gas exchange values were not significantly different between the Accepted for publication April 7, 2010. 2 groups. The number of times a change in infusion dose was needed was significantly lower in group D (2 patients with 1 change each) than in group M (3 patients with 1 change, 1 patient with 2 changes, and 3 patients with 3 changes each) (P < 0.01).Conclusions: Dexmedetomidine and midazolam are both effective sedatives for patients with NIV. Dexmedetomidine required fewer adjustments in dosing compared with midazolam to maintain adequate sedation
Perthes Syndrome associated with intramedullary spinal cord hemorrhage in a 4-year-old child: a case report
No full text
Morphologic evaluation of cervical and lumbar facet joints: intra-articular facet block considerations.
No full textSTUDY DESIGN: Needle orientations for lumbar and cervical facet injection were measured in cadavers and compared with facet angles measured on magnetic resonance images (MRIs). OBJECTIVES: To establish facet orientation relative to clinical procedures of a facet joint block in the cervical and lumbar spine. METHODS: Needle orientation angles were measured from 20 unembalmed human cadaveric specimens (13 cervical and 7 lumbar). Spinal needles were inserted into the midpoints of the facet joint spaces from C3 to C7 and L1 to L5. Needle trajectories were measured with an optical tracking system. For comparison, facet angles from 100 clinical MRIs of lumbar spines were also measured. Facet orientations on MRIs were measured at their intersection with the transverse plane, and angles were quantified using image analysis software. RESULTS: Typical angles for insertion of the needle into the cervical facets were oriented closer to the coronal plane, whereas insertion angles for lumbar needles were oriented closer to the sagittal plane. Relative to the sagittal plane, the mean cervical angle was 72 degrees and the mean lumbar angle was 33 degrees. The insertion points of the cervical facets were a mean of 29 mm from the midsagittal plane compared with a mean of 22 mm for the lumbar facets. MRI-based facet joint angles correlated poorly with actual injection angles, which were overestimated 5 to 23 degrees, depending on the lumbar level. CONCLUSIONS: Knowledge of the quantitative anatomy of the facets may help improve clinical diagnosis and treatment. These data also may aid in constructing more realistic computer simulations
Intraperitoneal Alpha-Lipoic Acid to prevent neural damage after crush injury to the rat sciatic nerve
No full text
Pneumothorax, pneumomediastinum, tracheo-esophageal fistula presenting with endotracheal intubation in post-cesarean period: A case report
No full textDexamethasone in critically ill patients admitted to intensive care unit with COVID-19 pneumonia
No full textAbstract Background Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) causes acute respiratory distress syndrome and hyperinflammation. Dexamethasone is used to suppress hyperinflammation and reduce death. Methods In this single-center retrospective study, we compared the mortality and length of stay in the intensive care unit of patients who received dexamethasone and those who did not. Results Between March 11, 2020, and January 31, 2021, 141 patients who were admitted to the intensive care unit with severe COVID-19 were included in this study. Group 1 included 111 patients who received dexamethasone 6 mg for 10 days, and group 2 included 30 patients who did not receive dexamethasone. Mortality at 28 days was 72 (65%) in group 1 and 14 (46%) in group 2 (p = 0.07). The length of stay in the intensive care unit was longer in group 1 than in group 2 (median (min–max) 8 (3–50) versus 13 (3–74), p = 0.01). The number of culture-positive secondary infections was higher in group 1 than in group 2 (p = 0,04). Conclusions In this study, a benefit in mortality could not be shown in patients who received dexamethasone. The length of stay in the intensive care unit was longer in the group that used dexamethasone than in the usual care group. Key messages A benefit in mortality could not be shown in patients who received dexamethasone. The length of stay in the intensive care unit was longer in the group that used dexamethasone than in the usual care group
- …
