Mesogonadal shunts for extrahepatic portal vein thrombosis and variceal hemorrhage.

Extrahepatic portal vein thrombosis (EHPVT) may occur in children or adults and usually comes to clinical attention due to complications of portal hypertension such as variceal hemorrhage. A variety of standard surgical techniques exist to manage these patients, but when these fail surgical options are limited. We describe two novel portosystemic shunts that utilize the gonadal vein as an autologous conduit. Four patients were evaluated for EHPVT with variceal bleeding. None of the patients were candidates for a standard splenorenal shunt due to prior surgical procedures. The first patient underwent a left mesogonadal shunt and the remaining 3 patients underwent a right mesogonadal shunt. Postoperative ultrasound or computed tomography (CT) scan confirmed early patency of the shunt in each patient. There have been no further episodes of variceal hemorrhage with follow-up of 3.5 years in the child who underwent the left mesogonadal shunt, and 17, 19, and 20 months in the patients who underwent the right mesogonadal shunt. Three of the 4 shunts remain patent. One shunt thrombosis occurred in a patient homozygous for the Factor V Leiden mutation despite anticoagulation with coumadin. This is the first report of the successful use of the gonadal vein as an in situ conduit for constructing a portosystemic shunt. In conclusion, the right and left mesogonadal shunts may be useful as salvage operations for patients with EHPVT who have failed standard surgical shunt procedures.     

Evidence-based practice for the use of N-acetylcysteine.

The use of N-acetylcysteine has increased in the prevention of radiographic contrast induced nephrotoxicity. Many nurses need to be aware of the proper administration and action of this prophylactic agent. This article discusses the research behind the use of N-acetylcysteine and the protocol for administration to prevent radiographic contrast-induced nephrotoxicity.     

Visual acuity results in school-aged children and adults: Lea Symbols chart versus Bailey-Lovie chart.

PURPOSE: To compare visual acuity results obtained using the Lea Symbols chart with visual acuity results obtained with the Bailey-Lovie chart in school-aged children and adults using a within-subjects comparison of monocular acuity results. METHODS: Subjects were 62 individuals between 4.5 and 60 years of age, recruited from patients seen in five optometry clinics. Each subject had acuity of the right eye and the left eye tested with the Lea Symbols chart and the Bailey-Lovie chart, with order of testing varied across subjects. Outcome measures were monocular logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) visual acuity and inter-eye acuity difference in logMAR units for each test. RESULTS: Correlation between acuity results obtained with the two charts was high. There was no difference in absolute inter-eye acuity difference measured with the two acuity charts. However, on average, Lea Symbols acuity scores were one logMAR line better than Bailey-Lovie acuity scores, and this difference increased with worse visual acuity. CONCLUSIONS: The Lea Symbols chart provides a measure of inter-eye difference that is similar to that obtained with the Bailey-Lovie chart. However, the monocular acuity results obtained with the Lea Symbols chart differ from those obtained with the Bailey-Lovie chart, and the difference is dependent on the individual's absolute level of visual acuity.