Venous thromboembolism with renal infarct due to paradoxical embolism.

Paradoxical thromboembolism has variable presentation depending on site of embolisation. An African-American man in his 40s presented with severe abdominal pain, watery stools and exertional dyspnoea. At presentation, he was tachycardic and hypertensive. Labwork showed elevated creatinine with unknown baseline. Urinalysis showed pyuria. A CT scan was unremarkable. He was admitted with working diagnosis of acute viral gastroenteritis and prerenal acute kidney injury and supportive care was instituted. On day 2, the pain migrated to left flank. Renal artery duplex ruled out renovascular hypertension but showed a lack of distal renal perfusion. MRI confirmed a renal infarct with renal artery thrombosis. Transoesophageal echocardiogram confirmed a patent foramen ovale. Simultaneous arterial and venous thrombosis require hypercoagulable workup, including investigation for malignancy, infection or thrombophilia. Rarely, venous thromboembolism can directly cause arterial thrombosis by 'paradoxical thromboembolism'. Given the rarity of renal infarct, high index of clinical suspicion is necessary.

Lumbar neuraxial procedures in thrombocytopenic patients across populations: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: There is currently no consensus regarding the minimum threshold platelet count to ensure safe neuraxial procedures. Numerous reports describe the safe performance of lumbar punctures in severely thrombocytopenic patients but reports of neuraxial anesthetic procedures in thrombocytopenic patients are limited. To date, the focus on specific populations in contemporary reviews has failed to include any actual hematoma cases. This systematic review aggregates reported lumbar neuraxial procedures from diverse thrombocytopenic populations to best elucidate the risk of spinal epidural hematoma. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, CINAHL databases were searched for articles about thrombocytopenic patients (<100,000 × 106/L) who received a lumbar neuraxial procedure (lumbar puncture; spinal, epidural, or combined spinal-epidural analgesia/anesthesia; epidural catheter removal), whether spinal epidural hematoma occurred. RESULTS: Of 4167 articles reviewed, 131 met inclusion criteria. 7476 lumbar neuraxial procedures were performed without and 33 procedures with spinal epidural hematoma. Within the platelet count ranges of 1-25,000 × 106/L, 26-50,000 × 106/L, 51-75,000 × 106/L, and 76-99,000 × 106/L there were 14, 6, 9, and 4 spinal epidural hematomas, respectively. An infection point and narrow confidence intervals were observed near 75,000 × 106/L or above, reflecting a low probability of spinal epidural hematoma in this sample. Of the 19 spinal epidural hematoma cases for which the onset of symptoms was reported, 18 (95%) were symptomatic within 48 h of the procedure. CONCLUSIONS: Spinal epidural hematoma in thrombocytopenic patients is rare. In this sample of patients, an inflection point and narrow confidence intervals are observed near a platelet count of 75,000 × 106/L or above, reflecting an estimated low spinal epidural hematoma event rate with more certainty given a larger sample size and inclusion of spinal epidural hematoma cases. Thrombocytopenic patients should be monitored, particularly in the first 48 h, and educated about symptoms concerning for spinal epidural hematoma.

Sacral anatomical interspace landmark for lumbar puncture in pregnancy: A randomized trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the sacral anatomical interspace landmark (SAIL) technique is more accurate than the classic intercristal line (ICL) technique in pregnant patients and to assess the percentage of clinical determinations above the third lumbar vertebra. METHODS: In this prospective, randomized, open-label trial, there were 110 singleton pregnant patients with gestational age greater than 37 weeks included. Selection procedure was a convenience sample of pregnant patients who presented for office visits or vaginal or cesarean delivery between March 15 and July 31, 2018, at a single-center obstetric tertiary care university hospital. Both techniques were evaluated by 2 physicians independently assessing each method. Before data collection, we hypothesized that the SAIL technique would be more accurate than the ICL technique in determining the L4-L5 interspace, and that the SAIL technique would produce more estimations below the third lumbar vertebra than the ICL technique. Therefore, the primary outcome was accuracy in identifying the L4-L5 lumbar interspace with SAIL vs ICL. The secondary outcome was difference in clinical assessments above the third lumbar vertebra. Both outcomes were measured via ultrasonography. RESULTS: Patients were 31 ± 5 years of age (mean ± SD) and had body mass index of 31.8 ± 5.7 kg/m2 and gestational age of 38.8 ± 1.1 weeks. A total of 110 patients were analyzed. SAIL correctly identified the L4-L5 interspace 49% of the time vs 8% using ICL (p < 0.0001). Estimations above L3 were 1% for SAIL vs 31% for ICL (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows improved accuracy in identifying intervertebral space using the SAIL technique; this may prevent direct mechanical trauma to the conus medullaris when lumbar punctures are performed in pregnancy. CLINICALTRIALSGOV IDENTIFIER: NCT03433612.