Celia R. S. R. Nogueira

University of São Paulo, San Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil

Are you Celia R. S. R. Nogueira?

Claim your profile

Publications (4)4.5 Total impact

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Surgical techniques of myocardial revascularization without the use of extracorporeal circulation (ECC) have raised hopes of attaining operative results with less systemic damage, lower occurrence of clinical complications and shorter hospital stay duration, generating expectations of lower hospital costs. To evaluate the hospital costs in patients submitted to myocardial revascularization with and without ECC and in those with stable multiarterial coronary disease with preserved ventricular function. The hospital costs were based on the existing governmental reimbursement. The costs included that of ortheses and prostheses and clinical complications. The time and costs of ICU stay and hospital stay duration were considered. Between January 2002 and August 2006, 131 patients were randomized to surgery with ECC (SECC), whereas 128 were randomized to surgery without ECC (WECC). The basal characteristics were similar for both groups. The costs of surgical complications were significantly lower (p < 0.001) in patients from the WECC when compared to the SECC group (606.00 +/- 525.00 vs. 945.90 +/- 440.00), as well as ICU costs: 432.20 +/- 391.70 vs. 717.70 +/- 257.70, respectively. The duration of the operating room stay were 4.9 +/- 1.1 h vs. 3.9 +/- 1.0 h, p < 0.001; at the ICU it was 48.2 +/- 17.2 h vs. 29.2 +/- 26.1h) (p < 0.001), with intubation time of 9.2 +/- 4.5 h vs. 6.4 +/- 5.1h, p < 0.001 for patients from the group with and without ECC, respectively. The present study allowed us to conclude that the myocardial revascularization surgery without extracorporeal circulation results in the decrease of operational costs and duration of the stay in each section related to the surgical treatment.
    Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia 12/2008; 91(6):340-6. · 1.12 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Coronary artery bypass grafting techniques without using cardiopulmonary bypass (off-pump CABG) result in less systemic damage, less clinical complications, less time spent in the intensive care unit, and shorter hospital stays, thereby raising the perspective of improved quality of life (QOL) for patients. To assess quality of life in patients who underwent on-pump and off-pump CABG. The Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) Questionnaire was administered to patients with stable multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD) and preserved ventricular function before and at six and 12 months after surgery. Between January 2002 and December 2006, a total of 202 patients were randomized to either on-pump or off-pump CABG. Demographic, clinical, laboratory, and angiographic characteristics were similar in both groups. One hundred and five patients underwent off-pump CABG and 97 underwent on-pump CABG. In the postoperative course, 22 patients had myocardial infarction, 29 reported angina, one was reoperated, and three experienced stroke. No patient died. Quality of life, as measured by the SF-36 questionnaire, was shown to be similar in both groups regarding physical and mental components. However, male patients showed a significant improvement in physical functioning and role limitations due to physical problems. Also, a large number of patients in both groups returned to work. Progressive enhancement in quality of life and early return to work were observed for all patients, regardless of the surgical technique used. Save for a greater improvement in physical functioning and role limitations due to physical problems experienced by male patients, no statistically significant differences were found in the other domains between groups.
    Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia 11/2008; 91(4):217-22, 238-44. DOI:10.1097/MCA.0000000000000037 · 1.12 Impact Factor
  • Source
    Arquivos Brasileiros de Cardiologia 01/2008; 91(6). DOI:10.1590/S0066-782X2008001800003 · 1.12 Impact Factor
  • Source
    Arquivos Brasileiros de Cardiologia 01/2008; 91(4). DOI:10.1590/S0066-782X2008001600006 · 1.12 Impact Factor