Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Luis F. Angel is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Luis F. Angel.


Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology | 2011

Systematic Review of the Use of Retrievable Inferior Vena Cava Filters

Luis F. Angel; Victor F. Tapson; Richard E. Galgon; Marcos I. Restrepo; John A. Kaufman

PURPOSE To review the available literature on retrievable inferior vena cava (IVC) filters to examine the effectiveness and risks of these devices. MATERIALS AND METHODS Investigators searched MEDLINE for clinical trials evaluating retrievable filters and reviewed the complications reported to the Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). RESULTS Eligibility criteria were met by 37 studies comprising 6,834 patients. All of the trials had limitations, and no studies were randomized. There were 11 prospective clinical trials; the rest were retrospective studies. Despite the limitations of the evidence, the IVC filters seemed to be effective in preventing pulmonary embolism (PE); the rate of PE after IVC placement was 1.7%. The mean retrieval rate was 34%. Most of the filters became permanent devices. Multiple complications associated with the use of IVC filters were described in the reviewed literature or were reported to the MAUDE database; most of these were associated with long-term use (> 30 days). At the present time, the objective comparison data of different filter designs do not support superiority of any particular design. CONCLUSIONS In high-risk patients for whom anticoagulation is not feasible, retrievable IVC filters seem to be effective in preventing PE. Long-term complications are a serious concern with the use of these filters. The evidence of the effectiveness and the risks was limited by the small number of prospective studies.


Critical Care Medicine | 2015

Management of the Potential Organ Donor in the ICU: Society of Critical Care Medicine/American College of Chest Physicians/Association of Organ Procurement Organizations Consensus Statement

Robert M. Kotloff; Sandralee Blosser; Gerard Fulda; Darren Malinoski; Vivek N. Ahya; Luis F. Angel; Matthew C. Byrnes; Michael A. DeVita; Thomas E. Grissom; Scott D. Halpern; Thomas A. Nakagawa; Peter G. Stock; Debra Sudan; Kenneth E. Wood; Sergio Anillo; Thomas P. Bleck; Elling E. Eidbo; Richard A. Fowler; Alexandra K. Glazier; Cynthia J. Gries; Richard Hasz; Daniel L. Herr; Akhtar Khan; David Landsberg; Daniel J. Lebovitz; Deborah J. Levine; Mudit Mathur; Priyumvada Naik; Claus U. Niemann; David R. Nunley

This document was developed through the collaborative efforts of the Society of Critical Care Medicine, the American College of Chest Physicians, and the Association of Organ Procurement Organizations. Under the auspices of these societies, a multidisciplinary, multi-institutional task force was convened, incorporating expertise in critical care medicine, organ donor management, and transplantation. Members of the task force were divided into 13 subcommittees, each focused on one of the following general or organ-specific areas: death determination using neurologic criteria, donation after circulatory death determination, authorization process, general contraindications to donation, hemodynamic management, endocrine dysfunction and hormone replacement therapy, pediatric donor management, cardiac donation, lung donation, liver donation, kidney donation, small bowel donation, and pancreas donation. Subcommittees were charged with generating a series of management-related questions related to their topic. For each question, subcommittees provided a summary of relevant literature and specific recommendations. The specific recommendations were approved by all members of the task force and then assembled into a complete document. Because the available literature was overwhelmingly comprised of observational studies and case series, representing low-quality evidence, a decision was made that the document would assume the form of a consensus statement rather than a formally graded guideline. The goal of this document is to provide critical care practitioners with essential information and practical recommendations related to management of the potential organ donor, based on the available literature and expert consensus.


JAMA | 2016

Effect of Endobronchial Coils vs Usual Care on Exercise Tolerance in Patients With Severe Emphysema: The RENEW Randomized Clinical Trial

Frank C. Sciurba; Gerard J. Criner; Charlie Strange; Pallav L. Shah; Gaetane Michaud; Timothy A. Connolly; G. Deslee; William P. Tillis; Antoine Delage; Charles-Hugo Marquette; Ganesh Krishna; Ravi Kalhan; J. Scott Ferguson; Michael A. Jantz; Fabien Maldonado; Robert J. McKenna; Adnan Majid; Navdeep S. Rai; Mark T. Dransfield; Luis F. Angel; Roger A. Maxfield; Felix J.F. Herth; Momen M. Wahidi; Atul C. Mehta; Dirk-Jan Slebos

IMPORTANCE Preliminary clinical trials have demonstrated that endobronchial coils compress emphysematous lung tissue and may improve lung function, exercise tolerance, and symptoms in patients with emphysema and severe lung hyperinflation. OBJECTIVE To determine the effectiveness and safety of endobronchial coil treatment. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Randomized clinical trial conducted among 315 patients with emphysema and severe air trapping recruited from 21 North American and 5 European sites from December 2012 through November 2015. INTERVENTIONS Participants were randomly assigned to continue usual care alone (guideline based, including pulmonary rehabilitation and bronchodilators; n = 157) vs usual care plus bilateral coil treatment (n = 158) involving 2 sequential procedures 4 months apart in which 10 to 14 coils were bronchoscopically placed in a single lobe of each lung. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary effectiveness outcome was difference in absolute change in 6-minute-walk distance between baseline and 12 months (minimal clinically important difference [MCID], 25 m). Secondary end points included the difference between groups in 6-minute walk distance responder rate, absolute change in quality of life using the St Georges Respiratory Questionnaire (MCID, 4) and change in forced expiratory volume in the first second (FEV1; MCID, 10%). The primary safety analysis compared the proportion of participants experiencing at least 1 of 7 prespecified major complications. RESULTS Among 315 participants (mean age, 64 years; 52% women), 90% completed the 12-month follow-up. Median change in 6-minute walk distance at 12 months was 10.3 m with coil treatment vs -7.6 m with usual care, with a between-group difference of 14.6 m (Hodges-Lehmann 97.5% CI, 0.4 m to ∞; 1-sided P = .02). Improvement of at least 25 m occurred in 40.0% of patients in the coil group vs 26.9% with usual care (odds ratio, 1.8 [97.5% CI, 1.1 to ∞]; unadjusted between-group difference, 11.8% [97.5% CI, 1.0% to ∞]; 1-sided P = .01). The between-group difference in median change in FEV1 was 7.0% (97.5% CI, 3.4% to ∞; 1-sided P < .001), and the between-group St Georges Respiratory Questionnaire score improved -8.9 points (97.5% CI, -∞ to -6.3 points; 1-sided P < .001), each favoring the coil group. Major complications (including pneumonia requiring hospitalization and other potentially life-threatening or fatal events) occurred in 34.8% of coil participants vs 19.1% of usual care (P = .002). Other serious adverse events including pneumonia (20% coil vs 4.5% usual care) and pneumothorax (9.7% vs 0.6%, respectively) occurred more frequently in the coil group. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Among patients with emphysema and severe hyperinflation treated for 12 months, the use of endobronchial coils compared with usual care resulted in an improvement in median exercise tolerance that was modest and of uncertain clinical importance, with a higher likelihood of major complications. Further follow-up is needed to assess long-term effects on health outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01608490.


American Journal of Transplantation | 2009

Antifungal prophylaxis with voriconazole or itraconazole in lung transplant recipients: Hepatotoxicity and effectiveness

Jose Cadena; Deborah J. Levine; Luis F. Angel; P. R. Maxwell; R. Brady; Juan F. Sanchez; Joel E. Michalek; Stephanie M. Levine; Marcos I. Restrepo

Invasive fungal infections (IFI) are common after lung transplantation and there are limited data for the use of antifungal prophylaxis in these patients. Our aim was to compare the safety and describe the effectiveness of universal prophylaxis with two azole regimens in lung transplant recipients.


Critical Care Medicine | 2002

Repeat bedside percutaneous dilational tracheostomy is a safe procedure.

Marianne Meyer; Jonathan F. Critchlow; Naresh G. Mansharamani; Luis F. Angel; Robert Garland; Armin Ernst

ObjectivePrevious tracheostomy has been considered a relative contraindication for percutaneous dilational tracheostomy. The objective of this study was to assess the safety of percutaneous dilational tracheostomy in critically ill patients with a history of previous tracheostomy. DesignRetrospective, single-center case series of all consecutive patients requiring repeat tracheostomy for continued mechanical ventilatory support. SettingIntensive care unit of a tertiary-care referral center. SubjectsFourteen patients (eight female, six male) with a median age of 70 yrs (range, 33–94). All patients had previously undergone tracheostomy. InterventionBedside percutaneous dilational tracheostomy. Measurement and Main ResultsSubjects’ previous tracheostomies dated back between 10 days and 8 yrs. Present intubation time before percutaneous dilational tracheostomy varied between 4 and 30 days. Bedside percutaneous dilational tracheostomy was performed successfully in all 14 patients by trained pulmonologists and surgeons. Eleven patients received an 8-mm and three received a 7-mm tracheostomy tube. There were no significant periprocedural complications, and no patient required surgical revision. The only postprocedural complication was accidental decannulation in one patient, which was managed with repeat percutaneous dilational tracheostomy. ConclusionsTrained physicians can safely perform bedside percutaneous dilational tracheostomy after previous tracheostomy. Percutaneous dilational tracheostomy offers an alternative to surgical tracheostomy in this particular patient population and should not be considered contraindicated.


Chest | 2012

Monitoring of Nonsteroidal Immunosuppressive Drugs in Patients With Lung Disease and Lung Transplant Recipients: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines

Robert P. Baughman; Keith C. Meyer; Ian Nathanson; Luis F. Angel; Sangeeta Bhorade; Kevin M. Chan; Daniel A. Culver; Christopher G. Harrod; Mary S. Hayney; Kristen B. Highland; Andrew H. Limper; Herbert Patrick; Charlie Strange; Timothy Whelan

OBJECTIVES Immunosuppressive pharmacologic agents prescribed to patients with diffuse interstitial and inflammatory lung disease and lung transplant recipients are associated with potential risks for adverse reactions. Strategies for minimizing such risks include administering these drugs according to established, safe protocols; monitoring to detect manifestations of toxicity; and patient education. Hence, an evidence-based guideline for physicians can improve safety and optimize the likelihood of a successful outcome. To maximize the likelihood that these agents will be used safely, the American College of Chest Physicians established a committee to examine the clinical evidence for the administration and monitoring of immunosuppressive drugs (with the exception of corticosteroids) to identify associated toxicities associated with each drug and appropriate protocols for monitoring these agents. METHODS Committee members developed and refined a series of questions about toxicities of immunosuppressives and current approaches to administration and monitoring. A systematic review was carried out by the American College of Chest Physicians. Committee members were supplied with this information and created this evidence-based guideline. CONCLUSIONS It is hoped that these guidelines will improve patient safety when immunosuppressive drugs are given to lung transplant recipients and to patients with diffuse interstitial lung disease.


Respiratory Medicine | 2012

Status asthmaticus in the medical intensive care unit: A 30-year experience *

Jay I. Peters; J. Eric Stupka; Harjinder Singh; Jill Rossrucker; Luis F. Angel; Jairo Melo; Stephanie M. Levine

OBJECTIVES To investigate the characteristics, trends in management (permissive hypercapnia; mechanical ventilation (MV); neuromuscular blockade) and their impact on complications and outcomes in Status Asthmaticus (SA). METHODS We performed a retrospective observational study of subjects admitted with SA to a single multidisciplinary MICU over a 30-year period. All laboratory, radiologic, respiratory care, physician notes and orders were extracted from an electronic medical record (EMR) maintained during the entire duration of the study. RESULTS Two hundred and twenty-seven subjects were admitted with 280 episodes of SA. While subjects reflected our regional population (52% Hispanic), African Americans were over-represented (22%) and Caucasians under-represented (21%). Thirty-eight percent reported childhood asthma, 27% were steroid dependent (10% in the last 10 years), and 18% had a recent steroid taper. One hundred and thirty-nine (61.2%) required intubation. The duration of hospitalization was similar between mechanically ventilated and non-ventilated subjects (5.8±4.41 vs. 6.8±7.22 days; p=0.07). The overall complication rate remained low irrespective of the use of permissive hypercapnia or mode of mechanical ventilation (overall mortality 0.4%; pneumothorax 2.5%; pneumonia 2.9%). The frequency of SA declined significantly in the last 10 years of the study (12.4 vs. 3.2 cases/year). CONCLUSIONS Despite the frequent use of mechanical ventilation, mortality/complication rates remained extremely low. MV did not significantly increase the duration of hospitalization. At our institution, the frequency of SA significantly decreased despite an increase in emergency room visits for asthma.


Clinics in Chest Medicine | 2003

Comparison of surgical and percutaneous dilational tracheostomy

Luis F. Angel; Charles B Simpson

When significant clinical end points are considered, PDT is a cost-effective and safe alternative to ST in critically ill patients in the ICU when performed by skilled and experienced practitioners [1, 40]. There are insufficient data to establish clear superiority of either technique. Important advantages of PDT may include eliminating the need for operating room facilities and personnel by the performance of the procedure at the bedside and significantly decreasing the time interval between the decision to perform tracheostomy and the actual procedure [1, 2, 20].


Seminars in Immunopathology | 2011

Special issues in the management and selection of the donor for lung transplantation

Priyumvada Naik; Luis F. Angel

Lung transplantation is a viable treatment option for select patients with end-stage lung disease. Two issues hamper progress in transplantation: first, donor shortage is a major limitation to increasing the number of transplants performed. Secondly, recipient outcomes remain disappointing when compared with other solid organ transplant results. Outcomes are limited by primary graft dysfunction (PGD), the posttransplant acute lung injury that increases both short-and long-term mortality. Attempts to overcome donor shortage have included aggressively managing solid organ donors to increase the number of donor lungs suitable for transplantation. Yet, the quality of the lung donor is likely to be related to the probability of the recipient experiencing PGD. PGD is the culmination of a series of insults, hemodynamic, metabolic, and inflammatory, that begin with the brain dead donor and result in poor recipient outcomes. Understanding the mechanism of donor lung injury resulting from brain death and the possible treatment strategies for its inhibition could help to increase the number of usable lungs and decrease the rate of PGD in the recipient. Here we present a review of the key pathways which result in donor lung injury, and follow this with a brief review of recent biomarkers that are proving to be instrumental to our ability to predict truly unsuitable lungs, and our ability to predict and hopefully prevent or treat recipients with subsequent lung injury.


Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology | 2013

Pilot Study Evaluating the Safety of a Combined Central Venous Catheter and Inferior Vena Cava Filter in Critically Ill Patients at High Risk of Pulmonary Embolism

Carlos Cadavid; Bladimir Gil; Alvaro Restrepo; Sergio Alvarez; Santiago Echeverry; Luis F. Angel; Victor F. Tapson; John A. Kaufman

The objectives of this pilot trial were to assess the safety of a new device for pulmonary embolism (PE) prophylaxis. The device, the Angel Catheter, was placed in eight patients who were in the intensive care unit and were at high risk of PE. The device was inserted at the bedside without fluoroscopic guidance via a femoral venous approach. All eight devices were inserted and subsequently retrieved without complications (follow-up, 33-36 d). One filter trapped a large clot.

Collaboration


Dive into the Luis F. Angel's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Stephanie M. Levine

University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Deborah J. Levine

University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Scott B. Johnson

University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

John H. Calhoon

University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Marcos I. Restrepo

University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Antonio Anzueto

University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Edward Y. Sako

University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

John E. Cornell

University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Cynthia D. Mulrow

University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio

View shared research outputs
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge