Cholecystitis after trauma.

BACKGROUND: The goal of this project was to investigate incidence, risk factors, histologic findings, and mortality rate of posttraumatic cholecystitis requiring surgical treatment. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of all patients admitted to the intensive care unit of an urban trauma center between April 1998 and January 2005. Data from the hospital and intensive care documentation systems databases and patients' charts were reviewed. All patients with cholecystitis treated by cholecystectomy were selected for further study. Potential risk factors, diagnostic, and histologic findings were analyzed. RESULTS: Cholecystitis was a fairly frequent finding in critically ill trauma patients (67 of 2,625 patients, 2.6%). Almost 10% of the patients with severe multiple injuries developed cholecystitis. Histologic findings showed a wide variation; three main diagnoses were established: acute acalculous cholecystitis (n = 28), chronic acalculous cholecystitis (n = 25), and cholecystitis with cholecystolithiasis (n = 13). Patients with acute acalculous cholecystitis and chronic acalculous cholecystitis were significantly younger and had significantly higher injury severity scores than patients with either cholecystitis with cholecystolithiasis or without cholecystitis. Noninvasive diagnostic tools such as ultrasonographic signs and laboratory data did not correlate with histologic diagnosis. Well-timed cholecystectomy within 24 hours after clinical suspicion lead to a 4.4% mortality rate in this group of patients. CONCLUSION: Cholecystitis after trauma is not a uniform disease. Although trauma severity seems to play an important role in the development or exacerbation of acalculous cholecystitis or both, cholecystolithiasis may play a significant role in patients with moderate to minor trauma. Intensivists should be aware of this complication in critically ill trauma patients because it seems to occur more frequently than previously assumed. Diagnosis can only be made if clinical signs, laboratory data, and ultrasonographic findings are taken into consideration. If posttraumatic cholecystitis is treated in an early stage by cholecystectomy, mortality rate remains low.

Phase 1A safety assessment of intravenous amitriptyline.

UNLABELLED: The antidepressant amitriptyline is used as an adjuvant in the treatment of chronic pain. Among its many actions, amitriptyline blocks Na+ channels and nerves in several animal and human models. As perioperative intravenous lidocaine has been suggested to decrease postoperative pain, amitriptyline, because of its longer half-life time, might be more useful than lidocaine. However, the use of intravenous amitriptyline is not approved by the US Food and Drug Administration. We therefore investigated the adverse effects of preoperative intravenous amitriptyline in a typical phase 1A trial. After obtaining written Food and Drug Administration and institutional review board approval, we obtained written consent for preoperative infusion of amitriptyline in an open-label, dose-escalating design (25, 50, and 100 mg, n=5 per group). Plasma levels of amitriptyline/nortriptyline were determined, and adverse effects were recorded in a predetermined symptom list. Infusion of 25 and 50 mg amitriptyline appears to be well tolerated; however, the study was terminated when 1 subject in the 100-mg group developed severe bradycardia. Intravenous infusion of amitriptyline (25 to 50 mg over 1 hour) did not create side effects beyond dry mouth and drowsiness, or dizziness, in 2 of our 10 otherwise healthy participants receiving the 25- to 50-mg dose. An appropriately powered future trial is necessary to determine a potential role of amitriptyline in decreasing postoperative pain. PERSPECTIVE: Amitriptyline potently blocks the persistently open Na+ channels, which are known to be instrumental in various pain states. As this occurs at very low plasma concentrations, a single preoperative intravenous infusion of amitriptyline could provide long-lasting pain relief and decrease the incidence of chronic pain.

[First aid measures by bystanders at the place of accident. A prospective, epidemiologic study in the Vienna area]. / Massnahmen durch Ersthelfer am Unfallort. Eine prospektive, epidemiologische Studie im Raum Wien.

The object of this prospective, epidemiological study was to determine whether bystanders provided necessary first aid measures in the prehospital trauma setting, whether they performed these measures correctly, and whether the level of first aid training affected the quality of first aid measures performed. Data were collected by means of a questionnaire, which was filled out between March and July 2000 for all cases attended to by the Vienna Ambulance Service. A total of 2812 cases were documented. The most frequent causes of trauma were falls from heights less than 1 meter (50%) and traffic accidents (17%). The most frequent injuries were injuries to the extremities (59%) and head and traumatic brain injuries (42%). Most patients were "moderately" or "severely" injured (69% and 29%, respectively), but life-threatening injuries were rare (2%). Bystanders were present in 57% of the cases. The most frequently required first aid measures were "application of a dressing" and "positioning" of the patient. "Control of haemorrhage", "ensuring accident site safety" and "extrication" of the patient were less frequently required. "Clearing of the airway", "precautions against hypothermia" and cardio-pulmonary resuscitation were very rarely required. Bystanders were most frequently policemen, relatives or friends of the patient, and strangers. The vast majority of bystanders had no training in first aid or had only attended the first aid course required to attain a driving license. We found a clear relationship between the level of first aid training and the quality of first aid measures provided. It would be advisable to offer an increased amount of refresher courses in first aid to improve bystander trauma care.

Emergency room management of patients with blunt major trauma: evaluation of the multislice computed tomography protocol exemplified by an urban trauma center.

BACKGROUND: The early clinical management of patients with major trauma still represents a challenge. To clinically evaluate the full extent of a patient's injuries is difficult, especially when the patient is unconscious. Before December 2002, trauma patients admitted to our emergency room (ER) underwent a diagnostic protocol including physical examination, conventional radiography (CR), sonography and further procedures if necessary. After the installation of a MSCT scanner, all trauma patients underwent the "MSCT protocol" immediately after admission. The aim of the study was to compare the "MSCT-protocol" as it is performed at our institution, with the "Pre-MSCT-protocol". METHODS: We compared 185 patients undergoing the "Pre MSCT-protocol" with 185 patients undergoing "MSCT protocol". We evaluated the efficacy, speed and accuracy of the "MSCT protocol" using several variables. Time periods from admission to the ER to admission to the intensive care unit were compared as well as outcome parameters such as length of ICU stay, ventilation period and rates of organ. Dichotomous data were analyzed by Chi-square analysis; continuous data were analyzed by Student's t test. Any values of p < 0.05 were considered significant for any test. RESULTS: No significant differences were found regarding demographic data. The full extent of injuries was definitively diagnosed after 12 +/- 9 minutes in 92.4% of the "MSCT protocol" cohort. In only 76.2% of "Pre-MSCT protocol" cohort definitive diagnosis was possible after 41 +/- 27 minutes. Total ER time was 104 +/- 21 minutes with the "Pre-MSCT protocol" and 70 +/- 17 minutes with "MSCT protocol" (p < 0.05). "Pre-MSCT protocol" patients had a significantly longer ICU stay than "MSCT protocol" patients (p < 0.05). "MSCT protocol" patients had significantly fewer ventilation days (14.3 vs. 10.9 days). Furthermore, rates of organ failure were lower in patients undergoing the "MSCT protocol". CONCLUSION: We could demonstrate that immediate MSCT in patients with blunt major trauma leads to more accurate and faster diagnosis, and reduction of early clinical time intervals. We also observed a reduction in ventilation, ICU, and hospital days, and in organ failure rates, though this might have been partly due to small differences in case mix. The "MSCT protocol" algorithm seems to be safe and effective.

Phase Ia and Ib study of amitriptyline for ulnar nerve block in humans: side effects and efficacy.

BACKGROUND: The antidepressant amitriptyline is used as an adjuvant in the treatment of chronic pain conditions. Among its many actions, this drug also blocks ion channels, such as Na channels. Preliminary animal studies suggested that amitripty-line would be a longer-lasting local anesthetic than bupivacaine, with potentially fewer side effects. Therefore, the authors investigated the adverse effects and effectiveness of this drug when given for ulnar nerve blockade in human volunteers. METHODS: After obtaining written institutional review board approval and informed consent, a typical phase Ia trial was conducted by administration to the ulnar nerve at the level of the wrist in an open-label, dose-escalating fashion. Amitripty-line hydrochloride, 4 ml, at concentrations of 5, 10, and 20 mM (n = 4-9/group) was used for each volunteer. If no major side effects and nerve block were encountered, comparison in a randomized, double-blinded trial of amitriptyline (20 mM) to placebo and bupivacaine (4 mM) (n = 4-9/group), was to follow. A blunt needle was used to grade the pain, and motor blockade was assessed by the Froment test. RESULTS: There was no significant statistical difference in terms of side effects (pain, swelling, erythema, and sedation) among any groups. The analgesic effects of 20 mM amitriptyline and 4 mm bupivacaine solution were significantly higher than those of the placebo solution. CONCLUSIONS: Because of the lack of evidence that amitripty-line provides better nerve blockade than current local anesthetics and the potential for neurotoxicity, its use for peripheral nerve blockade in humans seems limited.