Yazar "Simsek, Guven" seçeneğine göre listele

Listeleniyor 1 - 2 / 2
  • [ X ]
    Öğe
    Point-of-care Lung Ultrasound, Lung CT and NEWS to Predict Adverse Outcomes and Mortality in COVID-19 Associated Pneumonia
    (Sage Publications Inc, 2022) Bardakci, Okan; Das, Murat; Akdur, Gokhan; Akman, Canan; Siddikoglu, Duygu; Simsek, Guven; Kaya, Feyyaz
    Introduction: The appraisal of disease severity and prediction of adverse outcomes using risk stratification tools at early disease stages is crucial to diminish mortality from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). While lung ultrasound (LUS) as an imaging technique for the diagnosis of lung diseases has recently gained a leading position, data demonstrating that it can predict adverse outcomes related to COVID-19 is scarce. The main aim of this study is therefore to assess the clinical significance of bedside LUS in COVID-19 patients who presented to the emergency department (ED). Methods: Patients with a confirmed diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia admitted to the ED of our hospital between March 2021 and May 2021 and who underwent a 12-zone LUS and a lung computed tomography scan were included prospectively. Logistic regression and Cox proportional hazard models were used to predict adverse events, which was our primary outcome. The secondary outcome was to discover the association of LUS score and computed tomography severity score (CT-SS) with the composite endpoints. Results: We assessed 234 patients [median age 59.0 (46.8-68.0) years; 59.4% M), including 38 (16.2%) in-hospital deaths for any cause related to COVID-19. Higher LUS score and CT-SS was found to be associated with ICU admission, intubation, and mortality. The LUS score predicted mortality risk within each stratum of NEWS. Pairwise analysis demonstrated that after adjusting a base prediction model with LUS score, significantly higher accuracy was observed in predicting both ICU admission (DBA -0.067, P = .011) and in-hospital mortality (DBA -0.086, P = .017). Conclusion: Lung ultrasound can be a practical prediction tool during the course of COVID-19 and can quantify pulmonary involvement in ED settings. It is a powerful predictor of ICU admission, intubation, and mortality and can be used as an alternative for chest computed tomography while monitoring COVID-19-related adverse outcomes.
  • [ X ]
    Öğe
    Prediction of adverse outcomes using non-endoscopic scoring systems in patients over 80 years of age who present with the upper gastrointestinal bleeding in the emergency department
    (Turkish Assoc Trauma Emergency Surgery, 2022) Bardakci, Okan; Siddikoglu, Duygu; Akdur, Gokhan; Simsek, Guven; Atalay, Unzile; Das, Murat; Akdur, Okhan
    BACKGROUND: The emergency department (ED) admission rate for elderly patients with non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is increasing. The AIMS65 and Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS) are two distinct scoring systems proposed to predict in-hospital and post-discharge mortality, length of stay (LOS), and health-related costs in these patients. The objective of the present study is to evaluate the accuracy of these scoring systems, in conjunction with the Charlson comorbidity index (CCI), to predict 30-day mortality and LOS in UGIB patients who are 80 years of age or older METHODS: A retrospective analysis was undertaken of 182 patients with non-variceal UGIB who were admitted to the ED of Canakkale Onsekiz Mart University Hospital. The AIMS65, GBS, and CCI scores were calculated and adverse patient outcomes were assessed. RESULTS: The mean age of patients was 85.59 +/- 4.33 years, and 90 (49.5%) of the patients were males. The AIMS65 was superior to the GBS (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUROC] 0.877 vs. 0.695, respectively) and CCI (AUROC 0.877 vs. 0.526, respectively) in predicting the 30-day mortality. All three scores performed poorly in predicting the LOS in hospital. The cutoff threshold that maximized sensitivity and specificity for mortality was three for the AIMS65 score (sensitivity, 0.87; specificity, 0.80; negative predictive values [NPV], 0.977; positive predictive values [PPV], 0.392), 14 for GBS (sensitivity, 0.83; specificity, 0.51; NPV, 0.923; PPV, 0.367), and 5 for CCI (sensitivity, 0.91; specificity, 0.22; NPV, 0.946; PPV, 0.145). CONCLUSION: The AIMS65 is a simple, accurate, and non-endoscopic scoring system that can be performed easily in ED settings. It is superior to GBS and CCI in predicting 30-day mortality in elderly patients with UGIB.