SHoC-IVC: Does assessment of the inferior vena cava by point-of-care ultrasound independently predict fluid status in spontaneously breathing patients with undifferentiated hypotension?

BACKGROUND: Accurately determining the fluid status of a patient during resuscitation in the emergency department (ED) helps guide appropriate fluid administration in the setting of undifferentiated hypotension. Our goal was to determine the diagnostic utility of point-of-care ultrasound (PoCUS) for inferior vena cava (IVC) size and collapsibility in predicting a volume overload fluid status in spontaneously breathing hypotensive ED patients. METHODS: This was a post hoc secondary analysis of the SHOC-ED data, a prospective randomized controlled trial investigating PoCUS in patients with undifferentiated hypotension. We prospectively collected data on IVC size and collapsibility for 138 patients in the PoCUS group using a standard data collection form, and independently assigned a fluid status (volume overloaded, normal, volume deplete) from a composite clinical chart review blinded to PoCUS findings. The primary outcome was the diagnostic performance of IVC characteristics on PoCUS in the detection of a volume overloaded fluid status. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-nine patients had completed determinant IVC assessment by PoCUS, with one hundred twenty-five receiving successful final fluid status determination, of which one hundred and seven were classified as volume deplete, thirteen normal, and seven volume overloaded. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was plotted using several IVC size and collapsibility categories. The best overall performance utilized the combined parameters of a dilated IVC (> 2.5 cm) with minimal collapsibility (less than 50%) which had a sensitivity of 85.7% and specificity of 86.4% with an area under the curve (AOC) of 0.92 for predicting an volume overloaded fluid status. CONCLUSION: IVC PoCUS is feasible in spontaneously breathing hypotensive adult ED patients, and demonstrates potential value as a predictor of a volume overloaded fluid status in patients with undifferentiated hypotension. IVC size may be the preferred measure.

RéSUMé: CONTEXTE: La détermination précise de l'état du liquide d'un patient pendant la réanimation au service des urgences (SU) aide à guider l'administration appropriée du liquide dans le cadre d'une hypotension indifférenciée. Notre objectif était de déterminer l'utilité diagnostique de l'échographie au point de soins (PoCUS) pour la taille de la veine cave inférieure (IVC) et l'collapsibilité dans la prédiction d'un état de liquide de surcharge volumique chez les patients souffrant d'une hypotension respiratoire spontanée. MéTHODES: Il s'agissait d'une analyse secondaire post-hoc des données SHOC-ED, un essai contrôlé randomisé prospectif examinant PoCUS chez des patients atteints d'hypotension indifférenciée. Nous avons collecté prospectivement des données sur la taille et la collapsibilité des IVC pour 138 patients du groupe PoCUS à l'aide d'un formulaire de collecte de données standard, et attribué indépendamment un état de fluide (volume surchargé, normal, épuisement du volume) à partir d'une revue de dossier clinique composite mise en aveugle aux résultats PoCUS. Le résultat principal était la performance diagnostique des caractéristiques IVC sur PoCUS dans la détection d'un état de fluide surchargé en volume. RéSULTATS: 129 patients avaient terminé l'évaluation IVC des déterminants par PoCUS, dont 125 ont reçu une détermination finale du statut hydrique, dont 107 ont été classés comme étant une diminution du volume, 13 normaux et 7 surchargés. Une courbe des caractéristiques de fonctionnement du récepteur (ROC) a été tracée en utilisant plusieurs catégories de taille et d'affaissement IVC. La meilleure performance globale a utilisé les paramètres combinés d'une IVC dilatée (> 2,5 cm) avec une collapsibilité minimale (moins de 50%) qui avait une sensibilité de 85,7% et une spécificité de 86,4% avec une zone sous la courbe (AOC) de 0,92 pour prédire un état de fluide surchargé en volume. CONCLUSION: IVC PoCUS est faisable chez les patients adultes souffrant d'une hypotension respiratoire spontanée et démontre une valeur potentielle en tant que prédicteur d'un état de liquide surchargé en volume chez les patients atteints d'hypotension indifférenciée. La taille IVC peut être la mesure préférée.

Sonographic Findings of Left Ventricular Dysfunction to Predict Shock Type in Undifferentiated Hypotensive Patients: An Analysis From the Sonography in Hypotension and Cardiac Arrest in the Emergency Department (SHoC-ED) Study.

Introduction Patients that present to the emergency department (ED) with undifferentiated hypotension have a high mortality rate. Hypotension can be divided into four categories: obstructive, hypovolemic, distributive, and cardiogenic. While it is possible to have overlapping or concomitant shock states, being able to differentiate between cardiogenic shock and the other categories is important as it entails a different treatment regime and extra cautions. In this secondary analysis, we investigate if using focused cardiac ultrasonography (FOCUS) to determine left ventricular dysfunction (LVD) can serve as a reliable test for cardiogenic shock. Methods We prospectively collected FOCUS findings performed in 135 ED patients with undifferentiated hypotension as part of an international study. Patients with clearly identified etiologies for hypotension were excluded, along with other specific presumptive diagnoses. LVD was defined as the identification of a generally hypodynamic left ventricle in the setting of shock. FOCUS findings were collected using a standardized protocol and data collection form. All scans were performed by emergency physicians trained in ultrasound. Final shock type was defined as cardiogenic or noncardiogenic by independent specialist blinded chart review. Results In our findings, 135 patients had complete records for assessment of left ventricular function and additional follow-up data and so were included in this secondary analysis. The median age was 56 years and 53% of patients were male. Disease prevalence for cardiogenic shock was 12% and the mortality rate was 24%. The presence of LVD on FOCUS had a sensitivity of 62.50% (95% confidence interval 35.43% to 84.80%), specificity of 94.12% (88.26% to 97.60%), positive likelihood ratio (LR) 10.62 (4.71 to 23.95), negative LR 0.40 (0.21 to 0.75) and accuracy of 90.37% (84.10% to 94.77%) for detecting cardiogenic shock. Conclusion Detecting left ventricular dysfunction on FOCUS may be useful in the early identification of cardiogenic shock in otherwise undifferentiated hypotensive adult patients in the emergency department.

Pneumothorax Following Acupuncture.

Pneumothorax, the accumulation of air between the visceral and parietal pleurae, represents a potentially serious cause of chest pain in patients presenting to the emergency department. While there are known risk factors for spontaneous pneumothorax, in rare cases dry needling and acupuncture, forms of complementary and alternative medicine, have been known to result in pneumothorax. We present a case of a 38-year-old healthy female who presented with acute onset of pleuritic chest pain to the Emergency Department. On further history, it was discovered that she had received dry needling acupuncture for unrelated back pain the day prior to presentation. She was initially investigated with an electrocardiogram (ECG), which was unremarkable, and point of care ultrasound (POCUS), which showed absent lung sliding and the presence of a lung point on the right side, indicative of pneumothorax. This case describes the key features of pneumothorax on POCUS and how POCUS can be a valuable tool in the diagnosis of lung pathologies and highlights the importance of considering the rare but potentially serious complications of complementary and alternative medicine practices which are typically regarded as safe.

Does Point of Care Ultrasound Improve Resuscitation Markers in Undifferentiated Hypotension? An International Randomized Controlled Trial From The Sonography in Hypotension and Cardiac Arrest in the Emergency Department (SHoC-ED) Series.

Introduction Point of Care Ultrasound (PoCUS) protocols are commonly used to guide resuscitation for patients with undifferentiated hypotension, yet there is a paucity of evidence for any outcome benefit. We undertook an international multicenter randomized controlled trial (RCT) to assess the impact of a PoCUS protocol on key clinical outcomes. Here we report on resuscitation markers.  Methods Adult patients presenting to six emergency departments (ED) in Canada and South Africa with undifferentiated hypotension (systolic blood pressure (SBP) <100mmHg or a Shock Index >1.0) were randomized to receive a PoCUS protocol or standard care (control). Reported physiological markers include shock index (SI), and modified early warning score (MEWS), with biochemical markers including venous bicarbonate and lactate, at baseline and four hours.  Results A total of 273 patients were enrolled, with data collected for 270. Baseline characteristics were similar for each group. Improvements in mean values for each marker during initial treatment were similar between groups: Shock Index; mean reduction in Control 0.39, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.44 vs. PoCUS 0.33, 0.29 to 0.38; MEWS, mean reduction in Control 2.56, 2.22 to 2.89 vs. PoCUS 2.91, 2.49 to 3.32; Bicarbonate, mean reduction in Control 2.71 mmol/L, 2.12 to 3.30 mmol/L vs. PoCUS 2.30 mmol/L, 1.75 to 2.84 mmol/L, and venous lactate, mean reduction in Control 1.39 mmol/L, 0.93 to 1.85 mmol/L vs. PoCUS 1.31 mmol/L, 0.88 to 1.74 mmol/L. Conclusion We found no meaningful difference in physiological and biochemical resuscitation markers with or without the use of a PoCUS protocol in the resuscitation of undifferentiated hypotensive ED patients. We are unable to exclude improvements in individual patients or in specific shock types.

Just the Facts: Point-of-care ultrasound in the management of shoulder dislocations.

A 59-year-old man presents with left shoulder pain after falling while playing with his dog at the park. He drove himself to the emergency department (ED). He reports 5/10 pain and has reduced range of motion of the shoulder. His shoulder looks normal on exam and is not squared off. You wonder if he might have a posterior shoulder dislocation.

Does Point-of-care Ultrasonography Change Emergency Department Care Delivered to Hypotensive Patients When Categorized by Shock Type? A Post-Hoc Analysis of an International Randomized Controlled Trial from the SHoC-ED Investigators.

Introduction Our previously reported randomized-controlled-trial of point-of-care ultrasound (PoCUS) for patients with undifferentiated hypotension in the emergency department (ED) showed no survival benefit with PoCUS. Here, we examine the data to see if PoCUS led to changes in the care delivered to patients with cardiogenic and non-cardiogenic shock. Methods A post-hoc analysis was completed on a database of 273 hypotensive ED patients randomized to standard care or PoCUS in six centres in Canada and South Africa. Shock categories recorded one hour after the ED presentation were used to define subcategories of shock. We analyzed initial intravenous fluid volumes, as well as rates of inotrope use and procedures. Results  261 patients could be classified as cardiogenic or non-cardiogenic shock types. Although there were expected differences in the mean fluid volume administered between patients with non-cardiogenic and cardiogenic shock (p-value<0.001), there was no difference between the control and PoCUS groups (mean non-cardiogenic control 1881mL (95% CI 1567-2195mL) vs non-cardiogenic PoCUS 1763mL (1525-2001mL); and cardiogenic control 680mL (28.4-1332mL) vs. cardiogenic PoCUS 744mL (370-1117mL; p= 0.67). Likewise, there were no differences in rates of inotrope administration nor procedures for any of the subcategories of shock between the control group and PoCUS group patients. Conclusion Despite differences in care delivered by subcategory of shock, we did not find any difference in key elements of emergency department care delivered between patients receiving PoCUS and those who did not. This may help explain the previously reported lack of outcome differences between groups.

Does Point-of-Care Ultrasonography Improve Clinical Outcomes in Emergency Department Patients With Undifferentiated Hypotension? An International Randomized Controlled Trial From the SHoC-ED Investigators.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Point-of-care ultrasonography protocols are commonly used in the initial management of patients with undifferentiated hypotension in the emergency department (ED). There is little published evidence for any mortality benefit. We compare the effect of a point-of-care ultrasonography protocol versus standard care without point-of-care ultrasonography for survival and clinical outcomes. METHODS: This international, multicenter, randomized controlled trial recruited from 6 centers in North America and South Africa and included selected hypotensive patients (systolic blood pressure <100 mm Hg or shock index >1) randomized to early point-of-care ultrasonography plus standard care versus standard care without point-of-care ultrasonography. Diagnoses were recorded at 0 and 60 minutes. The primary outcome measure was survival to 30 days or hospital discharge. Secondary outcome measures included initial treatment and investigations, admissions, and length of stay. RESULTS: Follow-up was completed for 270 of 273 patients. The most common diagnosis in more than half the patients was occult sepsis. We found no important differences between groups for the primary outcome of survival (point-of-care ultrasonography group 104 of 136 patients versus standard care 102 of 134 patients; difference 0.35%; 95% binomial confidence interval [CI] -10.2% to 11.0%), survival in North America (point-of-care ultrasonography group 76 of 89 patients versus standard care 72 of 88 patients; difference 3.6%; CI -8.1% to 15.3%), and survival in South Africa (point-of-care ultrasonography group 28 of 47 patients versus standard care 30 of 46 patients; difference 5.6%; CI -15.2% to 26.0%). There were no important differences in rates of computed tomography (CT) scanning, inotrope or intravenous fluid use, and ICU or total length of stay. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this is the first randomized controlled trial to compare point-of-care ultrasonography to standard care without point-of-care ultrasonography in undifferentiated hypotensive ED patients. We did not find any benefits for survival, length of stay, rates of CT scanning, inotrope use, or fluid administration. The addition of a point-of-care ultrasonography protocol to standard care may not translate into a survival benefit in this group.

My patient has abdominal and flank pain: Identifying renal causes.

Acute flank and abdominal pain are common presenting complaints in the emergency department. With increasing access to point-of-care ultrasound (PoCUS), emergency physicians have an added tool to help identify renal problems as a cause of a patient's pain. PoCUS for hydronephrosis has a sensitivity of 72-83.3% and a varying specificity, similar to radiology-performed ultrasonography. In addition to assessment for hydronephrosis, PoCUS can help emergency physicians to exclude other serious causes of flank and abdominal pain such as the presence of an abdominal aortic aneurysm, or free fluid in the intraperitoneal space, which could represent hemorrhage. Use of PoCUS for the assessment of flank pain has resulted in more rapid diagnosis, decreased use of computed tomography, and shorter emergency department length of stay.

Thrombolytics for cardiac arrest: case report and systematic review of controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE: To describe a successful case involving the use of tenecteplase during cardiac arrest for presumed pulmonary embolism (PE) and to systematically review the evidence from controlled trials supporting the efficacy and safety of thrombolysis during cardiac arrest. CASE SUMMARY: A 48-year-old male presented to the emergency department with an acute onset of shortness of breath that began approximately 2 hours prior to presentation. Prior to undergoing a computed tomography (CT) scan to rule out PE, the patient went into cardiac arrest, with an initial rhythm of pulseless electrical activity at a rate of 140 beats/min. Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) was initiated and, due to suspected PE, a bolus dose of tenecteplase 50 mg was administered immediately following a single 1-mg dose of epinephrine. CPR was continued and 4 additional 1-mg doses of epinephrine and three 1-mg doses of atropine were given. After 13 minutes of CPR, return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) was achieved, with a blood pressure of 144/50 mm Hg. After the patient was stabilized, a CT scan demonstrated extensive bilateral pulmonary emboli in most segmental arteries. He was admitted to the intensive care unit where he was sedated, paralyzed, and treated with induced hypothermia for 24 hours. He was discharged from the hospital 2 weeks later on warfarin, with no noted neurologic deficits. DISCUSSION: A systematic search of MEDLINE (1950-August 2010), Embase (1980-August 2010), and Google Scholar (to August 2010) was conducted to identify prospective controlled trials that investigated the use of thrombolytic medications to treat cardiac arrest. Five trials involving 1544 undifferentiated cases of cardiac arrest were found. Overall, some trials reported an improved rate of ROSC following administration of thrombolytics, but there was no overall mortality reduction in any trial. There was, however, an increased risk of bleeding events following administration of a thrombolytic drug. CONCLUSIONS: Controlled trials demonstrate that there is a lack of benefit and potential harm in administering thrombolysis in an undifferentiated patient with cardiac arrest. However, the case we present provides evidence that fibrinolysis may benefit selected patients with cardiac arrest in whom PE is confirmed or in whom there is high index of suspicion of PE.

CAEP position statement on cellphone use while driving.

Distracted driving caused by cellphone use is a significant source of needless injuries. These injuries place unnecessary financial burden, emotional stress and health care resource misuse on society. This paper states the Canadian Association of Emergency Physician's (CAEP's) position on cellphone use while driving. In recent years, numerous studies were conducted on the danger of cellphone use while driving. Research has shown that cellphone use while driving negatively impacts cognitive functions, visual fields, reaction time and overall driving performances. Some studies found that cellphone use is as dangerous as driving under the influence of alcohol. Moreover, vehicle crash rates were shown to be significantly higher when drivers used cellphones. Countermeasures have been implemented in recent years. Over 50 countries worldwide have laws limiting the use of cellphones while driving. Six Canadian provinces, Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, Quebec, Ontario, British Columbia and Saskatchewan, currently have legislation prohibiting cellphone use. Other provinces are considering implementing similar bans. As emergency physicians, we must advocate for injury prevention. Cell phone related road traumas are avoidable. CAEP supports all measures to ban cellphone use while driving.