Talk:Postperfusion syndrome

message: need a cite for the Mayo study. When I try to find it, i get to about.com which is a closed site and a dead end. Take Care Will314159 01:33, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mayo Study 

message: There is a serious problem using National Enquirer as a source to imply this syndrome is affecting Dick Cheney; especially when it never mentions Dick Cheney even once. The article is even titled CLINTON'S SECRET HEALTH CRISIS . I've removed the source and tagged it as needing citation. Let's remember WP:Reliable Sources as well as the policy of no original research AuburnPilotTalk 00:14, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I created a reference section and converted the citations to references. If the links/sources in the External links section are actually references, they should be cited properly and removed from the External links section. -- AuburnPilottalk 17:33, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reliable Sources 

message: The line:
Side effects include memory loss, stilted speech, confusion, depression, and reduced hand-eye coordination. Some patients also suffer diminished sex drive.
Is a direct copy paste from the national enquirer article cited later in the article without being properly referenced or quoted.
Dlodge 18:26, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plagerism (from the National Enquirer) 

message: I have done a literature search on this subject and written sections with a lot of academic references - does anyone get the feeling this page has become too academic? Dlodge 18:43, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: IMHO, references are good-- and I think others agree.  If you look at the (medical) FAs and GAs they usually have loads of references. That said, I'm not sure if the language is accessible--e.g. I'm not sure if the average lay person knows what a neurocognitive impairment is. If you haven't already read it-- WP:MEDMOS has a few things to guide medical article writing. I think a good guide to "is it too jargon filled?" is --how would you explain it to a patient? Nephron  T|C 22:45, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too Academic? 

message: Why does googling "postperfusion syndrome" return so many entries referring to cytomegalovirus, none of which seem to be related to pumphead?
:"In the early 1960s, a postperfusion syndrome was recognized in open heart surgery patients who received large quantities of blood which were contaminated with CMV." ... "The postperfusion syndrome is essentially CMV mononucleosis acquired by blood transfusion."
:Two separate syndromes, the CMV postperfusion syndrome is a syndrome of mononucleosis like symptoms (now known to be CMV infection) after receiving CMV contaminated blood products. This may be something worth discussion on the CMV page. Dlodge 14:42, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cytomegalovirus? 

message: The ICD-9 code 999.8 was added to the page by User:Arcadian and subsequently removed by User:Nunh-huh with the edit summary "remove bogus ICD9 code."  Reviewing the ICD database this code does appear to be incorrect - 999.8 refers to complications of blood transfusions not otherwise defined. Dlodge 03:36, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed. I've just removed it again. The confusion is based on the fact that more than one syndrome has been called "postperfusion syndrome". ICD-9 code 999.8 does not relate to the subject of this article, but rather to a syndrome roughly equivalent to SIRS. - Nunh-huh 06:13, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: SIRS is . Postperfusion syndrome is . If you feel that 999.8 doesn't describe this article, then this article will need to be renamed or disambiguated. On my talk page, you stated "Unfortunately, ICD-9 coding seems fraught with confusion based on this sort of superficial similarity of naming, since it's not based on clinical criteria and is carried out by people without direct clinical experience." I do not believe your perspective on ICD coding is shared by the community at Wikipedia:WikiProject Clinical medicine. --Arcadian 09:28, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You're just plain wrong on the code. ICD9 code 999.8 is, to quote the ICD itself, "also known as" "Septic shock due to transfusion".  Ignoring the ICD-9's disambiguation results in erroneous coding. Matching names in a codebook is never going to be a substitute for actually understanding diseases.- Nunh-huh 10:20, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

text: There's no "correct" ICD-9 code here, so it's silly to add one. Why would it be 429.4 rather than, say 999 (complication of surgical and medical care, not elsewhere classified, which includes complications of extracorporeal circulation)? It certainly doesn't seem to be "a febrile illness associated with pericardial and sometimes pleuropulmonary reaction that often follows extensive pericardiotomy (429.4)." A classification scheme that fails to distinguish between Dressler's syndrome and "pump head" is medically and pedigogically useless. This is a case in which the ICD-9 code (even if there were a "correct" one, rather than several which could be cobbled together) adds no useful information to the article. - Nunh-huh 16:34, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Dressler's syndrome is . --Arcadian 17:40, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, that's only for Dressler's syndrome following an infarction. It's not used for postcardiotomy Dressler's. This once again demonstrates that there is no one-to-one correspondence between the ICD-9 and actual medical terminiology, and that similarity of names is no guarantee of similarity of ICD-9 code. - Nunh-huh 18:20, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

text: 429.4 is named "Functional disturbances following cardiac surgery" - and contains 38 index entries, with a common theme of being post cardiac surgery.  Many of these illnesses have their own code, but when attributed to a long term complication of cardiac surgery, they are coded as 429.4.  The ICD database does not have a specific index entry for post-perfusion syndrome, but if there were one, it would be 429.4.  The lack of a code is likely because there is no evidence of long-term cognitive decline caused by cardiac surgery (but good evidence of association with vascular disease). The solution is probably to remove the ICD box since no specific index entry actually exists. Dlodge 18:12, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: |In the absence of any comments here to the contrary, then, I'm going to go ahead and remove the classification again. - Nunh-huh 04:12, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  ICD-9 classification 

message: I have reverted the statements "conducted with no effort to properly randomize participants in each of the various study groups" and "the authors themselves noted the need for future studies to be conducted using proper population selection methods" by QuintBy to a prior revision.  These statements are a misinterpretation of the paper. This is a prospective, longitudinal study comparing three comparable groups with coronary artery disease with different medical and surgical interventions to heart healthy controls.  The authors acknowledge the non-randomization of the treatment strategy is "not ideal"  - however the important result is all groups with CAD experienced cognitive decline versus the heart healthy controls. You cannot randomize someone to have CAD or lack thereof; this non-randomization of treatment groups would only have relevance if the study claimed one treatment methodology was superior to another treatment.
The authors state in the abstract "this study emphasizes the need for appropriate control groups for interpreting longitudinal changes in cognitive performance after CABG" - this isn't noting this study needs to be redone with proper control groups, this is saying this study demonstrates the need for other studies to use proper control groups when investigating neurocognitive decline post CABG. Dlodge (talk) 00:03, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  McKhann reference 

message: * Pumphead: Does the Heart-lung Machine have a dark side? Scientific American January 9, 2009 http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/pumphead-heart-lung-machine/
* Discussion on theHeart.org: http://www.theheart.org/article/1009465.do
* http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19762724?dopt=Abstract
* Editorial: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19762723?dopt=Abstract
Dlodge (talk) 00:17, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  New references 

message: I couldnt find on the article; does anyone know how this thing got the "pumphead' nickname? I get the "pump" part but the "head" seems rather arbitrary (and somewhat mean sounding.) I will be trying to find a definitive answer to put in the article, but if anyone else already has such information that will save some time. 74.132.249.206 (talk) 13:51, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name 

message: doi:10.7326/M14-2793 JFW | T@lk 12:40, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Systematic review