Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 197
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1075
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3195
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once
98%
921
2 minutes
20
ObjectiveThis study aims to determine the outcomes of nickel allergic patients who underwent a trial of forearm arterial stenting with a nickel-based stent, with follow-up to assess for an allergic reaction. In the absence of adverse effects, patients had their intracranial aneurysm treatment with a nickel-based cerebrovascular device.MethodsA retrospective analysis was performed on patients who had an allergy to nickel, with an intracranial aneurysm who underwent treatment with a permanently implanted nickel-containing device. Nickel allergy was established by clinical history and dedicated patch testing. Outcomes such as in-stent thrombosis or any intracranial complications were recorded.ResultsOver a 10-year period, there were 18 patients who had a peripheral stent without development of in-stent stenosis, thrombosis or occlusion. One patient developed a cutaneous allergic reaction to the peripheral stent and their intracranial procedure was with a nitinol-free device.Of 17 patients who underwent intracranial treatment with a nitinol device, there was one patient who developed a postoperative complication of fish-mouthing of the device which has been reported in patients with a nickel contact allergy, but further studies are warranted to establish a causative relationship. Another patient omitted prescribed antiplatelet medication and occluded their stent. The remaining fifteen patients developed no complications with aneurysm occlusion on imaging.ConclusionPatients with a nickel allergy who would be eligible for endovascular treatment could benefit from trial peripheral arterial stenting. This provides an alternative approach to avoid unnecessarily eliminating endovascular treatment options with nickel-containing devices from which these patients may potentially still benefit.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/15910199251372502 | DOI Listing |