Veterinary surgery : VS · 2011
Use of the PleuralPort device for management of pleural effusion in six dogs and four cats.
Оценочное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Brooks Aimee C, Hardie Robert J
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To describe the placement technique, complications, and outcomes associated with use of the PleuralPort device for management of pleural effusion in dogs and cats.
STUDY DESIGN: Case Series.
ANIMALS: Six dogs and 4 cats.
METHODS: Medical records of all animals with pleural effusion managed with the PleuralPort device were reviewed. Data regarding signalment, fluid analysis, placement technique, duration of function, duration of implantation, complications, and outcome were collected. Owners and referring veterinarians were contacted for follow-up information.
RESULTS: Nine animals had chylous effusion and 1 dog had pleural carcinomatosis. Eleven ports were placed with 1 cat receiving bilateral ports. Four animals developed complications. One cat developed pneumothorax immediately after implantation and was euthanatized. In 2 dogs and 1 cat, the ports obstructed. The 6 remaining animals had functioning ports at time of death or resolution of effusion and no longer required use of the port. No significant port migration, irritation, or infection of the device was reported. Excluding the cat with pneumothorax, median duration of port function was 20 days (range 1-391), and median duration of port implantation was 391 days (range 6-723).
CONCLUSIONS: The PleuralPort device is a feasible option for the management of pleural effusion in dogs and cats.
STUDY DESIGN: Case Series.
ANIMALS: Six dogs and 4 cats.
METHODS: Medical records of all animals with pleural effusion managed with the PleuralPort device were reviewed. Data regarding signalment, fluid analysis, placement technique, duration of function, duration of implantation, complications, and outcome were collected. Owners and referring veterinarians were contacted for follow-up information.
RESULTS: Nine animals had chylous effusion and 1 dog had pleural carcinomatosis. Eleven ports were placed with 1 cat receiving bilateral ports. Four animals developed complications. One cat developed pneumothorax immediately after implantation and was euthanatized. In 2 dogs and 1 cat, the ports obstructed. The 6 remaining animals had functioning ports at time of death or resolution of effusion and no longer required use of the port. No significant port migration, irritation, or infection of the device was reported. Excluding the cat with pneumothorax, median duration of port function was 20 days (range 1-391), and median duration of port implantation was 391 days (range 6-723).
CONCLUSIONS: The PleuralPort device is a feasible option for the management of pleural effusion in dogs and cats.