Objective: Cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infections now constitute ∼ 10% of all endocarditis cases. The incidence of CIED infection is usually < 2%. Our objective was to study pacemaker pocket infection rate and different risk factors in our institution.
Methods: This observational study was conducted over a period of five years from January 2011 to December 2016 and it included 1096 patients. Common risk factors like patients with diabetes, repeat procedure, chronic renal failure, chronic obstructive airway disease, immunosuppressive agents were studied in our patients.
Results: Our study consisted of 1096 patients. Pacemaker pocket infection occurred in sixteen patients (1.5%). Chronic renal failure patients were one hundred thirty in our study (11.86%). There were three hundred fifty six diabetic patients (32.48%). Repeat procedure was done in ninety five patients (8.6%).
Results: Our study consisted of 1096 patients. Pacemaker pocket infection occurred in sixteen patients (1.5%). Chronic renal failure patients were one hundred thirty in our study (11.86%). There were three hundred fifty six diabetic patients (32.48%). Repeat procedure was done in ninety five patients (8.6%)
Eighty six patients were suffering from chronic obstructive airway (7.8%). Patients on immunosuppressive therapy were fourteen in our study (1.2%).
Conclusion: Pacemaker pocket infections is a dreaded complication after pacemaker implantation. During implantation, there is a risk of device contamination with the patient’s own skin flora and it can be prevented by ideal surgical asepsis technique, pre and perioperative use of antibiotics.
Raheel Khan, Atiq-ur-Rehman Selehria, Hafsa Aquil, Atif Sheraz, Sara Khan, Najwa Zahoor and Anashia Kayani*
Published on: 10th April, 2023
Gliomas are known to be one of the most grievous malignant central nervous system (CNS) tumors and have a high mortality rate with a low survival rate severe disability and increase risk of recurrence. Aim of his study is to determine the diagnostic accuracy of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) in differentiating low-grade and high-grade gliomas, taking histopathology as the gold standard. It is a Cross-sectional validation study conducted at the Armed Forces Institute of Radiology and Imaging, (AFIRI) Rawalpindi, Pakistan from 28th February 2022 to 27th August 2022.Materials and methods: A total of 215 patients with focal brain lesions of age 25-65 years of either gender were included. Patients with a cardiac pacemaker, breastfeeding females, de-myelinating lesions and malignant infiltrates, and renal failure were excluded. Then diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging was performed on each patient by using a 1.5 Tesla MR system. The area of greatest diffusion restriction (lowest ADC) within the solid tumor component was identified while avoiding areas of peritumoral edema. Results of ADC were interpreted by a consultant radiologist (at least 5 years of post-fellowship experience) for high or low-grade glioma. After this, each patient has undergone a biopsy in the concerned ward, and histopathology results were compared with ADC findings. Results: Overall sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and diagnostic accuracy of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) in differentiating low- and high-grade gliomas, taking histopathology as the gold standard was 93.65%, 87.64%, 91.47%, 90.70% and 91.16% respectively. Conclusion: This study concluded that apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) is the non-invasive modality of choice with high diagnostic accuracy in differentiating low- and high-grade gliomas.
Your service is very good and fast reply, Also your service understand our situation and support us to publication our articles.
Palestine College of Nursing, Khan Younis, Gaza Strip, Palestine
Ayman M Abu Mustafa
Your service is very good and fast reply, also your service understand our situation and support us to publication our articles.
Ayman M Abu Mustafa
"It was a pleasure to work with the editorial team of the journal on the submission of the manuscript. The team was professional, fast, and to the point".
NC A&T State University, USA
Moran Sciamama-Saghiv
Many thanks for publishing my article in your great journal and the friendly and hassle-free publication process, the constructive peer-review, the regular feedback system, and the Quick response to any queries.
Azab Elsayed Azab
Thanks you and your colleague for the great help for our publication. You always provide prompt responses and high quality of service. I am so happy to have you working with me.
Thanks again!
Diana (Ding) Dai
I like the quality of the print & overall service. The paper looks quite impressive. Hope this will attract interested readers. All of you have our best wishes for continued success.
Arshad Khan
Your journal has accomplished its intended mission of providing very effective and efficient goals in dealing with submissions, conducting the reviewing process and in publishing accepted manuscripts in a timely manner. Keep up the great work and services that you provide.
University of Jacqmar, Inc., USA
John St. Cyr
I, Muhammad Sarwar Khan, am serving as Editor on Archives of Biotechnology and Biomedicine (ABB). I submitted an editorial titled, 'Edible vaccines to combat Infectious Bursal Disease of poultry' for publication in ABB. After submitting the manuscript; the services rendered by the management and technical personnel to handle and process the manuscript were marvelous. Plagiarism report was shared with me with complements before reviewers' comments, All steps including article processing and service charges were well taken care of keeping in view the author's interest/preference. All together, it was an encouraging and wonderful experience working with ABB personnel.
University of Agriculture, Pakistan
Muhammad Sarwar Khan
I am to express my view that Heighten Science Publications are reliable quick even after peer review process. I hope and wish the publications will go a long way in disseminating science to many interested in scientific research.
College of Fisheries, CAU(I), Tripura, India
Ajit Kumar Roy
Journal of Pulmonary and Respiratory Research is good journal for respiratory research purposes. It takes 2-3 weeks maximum for review of the manuscript to get published and any corrections to be made in the manuscript. It needs good articles and studies to get publish in the respiratory medicine. I am really glad that this journal editors helped me to get my case report published.
If you are already a member of our network and need to keep track of any developments regarding a question you have already submitted, click "take me to my Query."