Differentiating central from peripheral causes of acute vertigo in an emergency setting with the HINTS, STANDING, and ABCD2 tests: A diagnostic cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Diagnosing stroke in dizzy patients remains a challenge in emergency medicine. The accuracy of the neuroophthalmologic examination HINTS performed by emergency physicians (EPs) is unknown. Our objective was to determine the accuracy of the HINTS examination performed by trained EPs for diagnosing central cause of acute vertigo and unsteadiness and to compare it with another bedside clinical tool, STANDING, and with the history-based score ABCD2. METHODS: This was a prospective diagnostic cohort study among patients with isolated vertigo and unsteadiness seen in a single emergency department (ED). Trained EPs performed HINTS and STANDING tests blinded to attending physicians. ABCD2 ≥ 4 was used as the threshold and was calculated retrospectively. The criterion standard was diffusion-weighted brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Peripheral diagnoses were established by a normal MRI, and etiologies were further refined by an otologic examination. RESULTS: We included 300 patients of whom 62 had a central lesion on neuroimaging including 49 strokes (79%). Of the 238 peripheral diagnoses, 159 were vestibulopathies, mainly benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (40%). HINTS and STANDING tests reached high sensitivities at 97% and 94% and NPVs at 99% and 98%, respectively. The ABCD2 score failed to predict half of central vertigo cases and had a sensitivity of 55% and a NPV of 87%. The STANDING test was more specific and had a better positive predictive value (PPV; 75% and 49%, respectively; positive likelihood ratio [LR+] = 3.71, negative likelihood ratio [LR-] = 0.09) than the HINTS test (67% and 44%, respectively; LR+ = 2.96, LR- = 0.04). The ABCD2 score was specific (82%, LR+ = 3.04, LR- = 0.56) but had a very low PPV (44%). CONCLUSIONS: In the hands of EPs, HINTS and STANDING tests outperformed ABCD2 in identifying central causes of vertigo. For diagnosing peripheral disorders, the STANDING algorithm is more specific than the HINTS test. HINTS and STANDING could be useful tools saving both time and costs related to unnecessary neuroimaging use.

Initial management of diabetic ketoacidosis and prognosis according to diabetes type: a French multicentre observational retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines for the management of diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) do not consider the type of underlying diabetes. We aimed to compare the occurrence of metabolic adverse events and the recovery time for DKA according to diabetes type. METHODS: Multicentre retrospective study conducted at five adult intermediate and intensive care units in Paris and its suburbs, France. All patients admitted for DKA between 2013 and 2014 were included. Patients were grouped and compared according to the underlying type of diabetes into three groups: type 1 diabetes, type 2 or secondary diabetes, and DKA as the first presentation of diabetes. Outcomes of interest were the rate of metabolic complications (hypoglycaemia or hypokalaemia) and the recovery time. RESULTS: Of 122 patients, 60 (49.2%) had type 1 diabetes, 28 (22.9%) had type 2 or secondary diabetes and 34 (27.9%) presented with DKA as the first presentation of diabetes (newly diagnosed diabetes). Despite having received lower insulin doses, hypoglycaemia was more frequent in patients with type 1 diabetes (76.9%) than in patients with type 2 or secondary diabetes (50.0%) and in patients with newly diagnosed diabetes (54.6%) (p = 0.026). In contrast, hypokalaemia was more frequent in the latter group (82.4%) than in patients with type 1 diabetes (57.6%) and type 2 or secondary diabetes (51.9%) (p = 0.022). The median recovery times were not significantly different between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Rates of metabolic complications associated with DKA treatment differ significantly according to underlying type of diabetes. Decreasing insulin dose may limit those complications. DKA treatment recommendations should take into account the type of diabetes.