Magnesium Sulfate Versus Lidocaine as an Adjunct for Renal Colic in the Emergency Department: A Randomized, Double-Blind Controlled Trial.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: We wished to determine whether the addition of magnesium sulfate (MgSO4) or lidocaine to diclofenac could improve the analgesic efficacy in emergency department (ED) patients with acute renal colic. METHODS: In this prospective, double-blinded, randomized controlled trial of patients aged 18 to 65 years with suspected acute renal colic, we randomized them to receive 75 mg intramuscular (IM) diclofenac and then intravenous (IV) MgSO4, lidocaine, or saline solution control. Subjects reported their pain using a numerical rating scale (NRS) before drug administration and then 5, 10, 20, 30, 60, and 90 minutes afterwards. Our primary outcome was the proportion of participants achieving at least a 50% reduction in the NRS score 30 minutes after drug administration. RESULTS: We enrolled 280 patients in each group. A 50% or greater reduction in the NRS score at 30 minutes occurred in 227 (81.7%) patients in the MgSO4 group, 204 (72.9%) in the lidocaine group, and 201 (71.8%) in the control group, with significant differences between MgSO4 and lidocaine (8.8%, 95% confidence interval [CI] [1.89 to 15.7], P=.013) and between MgSO4 and control (9.9%, 95% CI [2.95 to 16.84], P=.004). Despite this, differences between all groups at every time point were below the accepted 1.3 threshold for clinical importance. There were no observed differences between groups in the frequency of rescue analgesics and return visits to the ED for renal colic. There were more adverse events, although minor, in the MgSO4 group. CONCLUSION: Adding intravenous MgSO4, but not lidocaine, to IM diclofenac offered superior pain relief but at levels below accepted thresholds for clinical importance.

Value of inferior vena cava collapsibility index as marker of heart failure in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbation.

INTRODUCTION: Inferior vena cava (IVC) diameter variability with respiration measured by ultrasound was found to be useful for the diagnosis of heart failure (HF) in ED patients with acute dyspnea. Its value in identifying HF in acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbation (AECOPD) was not specifically demonstrated. OBJECTIVE: To determine the value of ΔIVC in the diagnosis of HF patients with AECOPD. METHODS: This is a prospective study conducted in the ED of three Tunisian university hospitals including patients with AECOPD. During this period, 401 patients met the inclusion criteria. The final diagnosis of HF is based on the opinion of two emergency experts after consulting the data from clinical examination, cardiac echocardiography, and BNP level. The ΔIVC was calculated by two experienced emergency physicians who were blinded from the patient's clinical and laboratory data. A cut off of 15% was used to define the presence (< 15%) or absence of HF (≥ 15%). Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was also measured. The area under the ROC curve, sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were calculated to determine the diagnostic and predictive accuracy of the ΔIVC in predicting HF. RESULTS: The study population included 401 patients with AECOPD, mean age 67.2 years with male (68.9%) predominance. HF was diagnosed in 165 (41.1%) patients (HF group) and in 236 patients (58.9%) HF was excluded (non HF group). The assessment of the performance of the ΔIVC in the diagnosis of HF showed a sensitivity of 37.4% and a specificity of 89.7% using the threshold of 15%. The positive predictive value was 70.9% and the negative predictive value was 66.7%. The area under the ROC curve was 0.71(95%, CI 0.65-0.76). ΔIVC values were not different between HF patients with reduced LVEF and those with preserved LVEF. CONCLUSION: Our results showed that ΔIVC has a good value for ruling out HF in ED patients consulting for AECOPD.

Melatonin, vitamins and minerals supplements for the treatment of Covid-19 and Covid-like illness: A prospective, randomized, double-blind multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: Melatonin, zinc, and multivitamins are among most recommended supplements in the fight against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We aimed to examine the efficacy and safety of this association in the treatment of COVID-19 and COVID-like illnesses. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter prospective, randomized, double-blind, controlled trial. Patients with no medical history consulting the emergency department for covid and covid-like illness and who were not hospitalized were included. Patients were assigned in a 1:1 ratio to the treatment or the placebo group. The primary outcome was studying the effectiveness of zinc multivitamin supplement and melatonin in the treatment of COVID and -like illnesses symptoms' according to the time from randomization to clinical improvement. The pre-specified secondary outcomes were date of disappearance of symptoms present on admission, appearance of an adverse effect due to the administration of the treatment, number of patients developing complications, requiring hospitalization, requiring respiratory support. RESULTS: One hundred sixty four patients were eligible for the study and were randomized to either the treatment group or the placebo group. Overall, 128 of the 164 patients had a PCR for SARS-CoV-2, yielding a positive PCR result in 49.1% of them. Regarding the disappearance of all initial presenting symptoms: on the 5th day of the follow-up, there was a significant difference between the two groups with a p value 0.04;On the 10th day, there was a significant difference too with p value of 0.038. There were no significant differences between the two groups in recovery during the 15th day of follow-up p>0.5. Finally, 100% of patients fully recovered in the treatment group vs 98.8% in the placebo group. No severe adverse events were reported throughout the trial. CONCLUSIONS: Our results showed that daily doses of Melatonin, zinc and vitamins did significantly reduce the duration of symptoms accelerating its disappearance among patients consulting with COVID-19 or COVID-19 like illness.

Canine olfactory detection and its relevance for the medical identification of patients with COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: The assessment of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) in exhaled breath or sweat represents a potential non-invasive and rapid diagnostic tool for respiratory diseases. OBJECTIVE: To determine if trained dogs can reliably identify the odour associated with COVID19. METHODS: This is a monocentric prospective study carried out in the Emergency Department (ED) of a university hospital fromJulyto November 2021.Axillary sweat samples from all patients were collected bytwo trained health care professionals. The samples were collected in the form of sterile gauze swabs placed under the armpits for at least 4 h for each patient.Then, Tubes wereshiftedto the double-blind dog training centre for VOC detection by two individuals. RESULTS: Dogs were tested using a total of 129 axillary sweat samples; 69 of the 107 patients who tested positive for COVID-19 based on their odours had a positive PCR/Antigen test and 19 of the 22 patients who were tested negative for COVID-19 by the dogs had a negative PCR test. The sniffer dog infection detection method had a sensitivity of 95.83% and a specificity of 33.33%. The PPV was 64.49% and the NPVwas 86.36%. The measurement of the intensity of the connection between the two variables (disease/sign) was very strong (Q = 0.84). This link is statistically significant (X2 = 19.13) with a probability p ≤ 0.001. CONCLUSION: Overall, the use of trained detection dogs as a screening method for SARS-CoV-2 is an interesting avenue of research that warrants further exploration and validation.

Value of Lung Ultrasound Sonography B-Lines Quantification as a Marker of Heart Failure in COPD Exacerbation.

Introduction: Identifying heart failure (HF) in acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) can be challenging. Lung ultrasound sonography (LUS) B-lines quantification has recently gained a large place in the diagnosis of HF, but its diagnostic performance in AECOPD remains poorly studied. Purpose: This study aimed to assess the contribution of LUS B-lines score (LUS score) in the diagnosis of HF in AECOPD patients. Patients and methods: This is a prospective cross-sectional multicenter cohort study including patients admitted to the emergency department for AECOPD. All included patients underwent LUS. A lung ultrasound score (LUS score) based on B-lines calculation was assessed. A cardiac origin of dyspnea was retained for a LUS score greater than 15. HF diagnosis was based on clinical examination, pro-brain natriuretic peptide levels, and echocardiographic findings. The LUS score diagnostic performance was assessed by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, sensitivity, specificity, and likelihood ratio at the best cutoffs. Results: We included 380 patients, mean age was 68±11.6 years, sex ratio (M/F) 1.96. Patients were divided into two groups: the HF group [n=157 (41.4%)] and the non-HF group [n=223 (58.6%)]. Mean LUS score was higher in the HF group (26.8±8.4 vs 15.3±7.1; p<0.001). The mean LUS score in the HF patients with reduced LVEF was 29.2±8.7, and was 24.5±7.6 in the HF patients with preserved LVEF. LUS score area under ROC curve for the diagnosis of HF was 0.71 [0.65-0.76]. The best sensitivity (89% [85.9-92,1]) was observed at the threshold of 5; the best specificity (85% [81.4-88.6]) was observed at the threshold of 30. Correlation between LUS score and E/E' ratio was good (R=0.46, p=0.0001). Conclusion: Our results suggest that LUS score could be helpful and should be considered in the diagnostic approach of HF in AECOPD patients, at least as a ruling in test.

Piroxicam and paracetamol in the prevention of early recurrent pain and emergency department readmission after renal colic: Randomized placebo-controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: Renal colic (RC) is a common urologic emergency often leading to significant pain and recurrent hospital visits. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of piroxicam versus paracetamol in preventing pain recurrence and hospital readmission in patients treated for RC and discharged from the emergency department (ED). METHODS: A prospective, randomized, single-blind trial was conducted in four EDs. Eligible adults with RC were randomized to receive oral piroxicam, paracetamol, or placebo for 5 days post-ED discharge. Primary outcomes included pain recurrence and ED readmission within 7 days. Secondary outcomes included time to recurrence and treatment-related side effects. RESULTS: Of 1383 enrolled patients, no significant differences were observed among the groups regarding baseline characteristics. Pain recurrence rates within 7 days were 29% (95% confidence interval [CI] 24.9%-33.2%) for piroxicam, 30.3% (95% CI 26.1%-34.5%) for paracetamol, and 30.8% (95% CI 26.6%-35.0%) for placebo, with no significant between-group differences (p = 0.84). Among patients experiencing recurrence, the majority encounter it within the initial 2 days following their discharge (86% in the piroxicam group, 84.1% in the paracetamol group, and 86% in the placebo group, respectively). ED readmission rates were similar across groups: 20.8% (95% CI 17.1%-24.5%) in the piroxicam group, 23.8% (95% CI 19.9%-27.7%) in the paracetamol group, and 22.9% (95% CI 19.1%-26.8%) in the placebo group (p = 0.52). The piroxicam group reported significantly higher adverse effects compared to others. CONCLUSIONS: Piroxicam and paracetamol did not demonstrate efficacy in preventing pain recurrence or ED readmission within the first week following RC treatment.

Mobile Phone-Based Telemonitoring for Improving Adherence to Analgesic Treatment in Trauma Patients After Emergency Department Discharge: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact of mobile-phone telemonitoring on patients' adherence and satisfaction with posttrauma pain treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a prospective randomized clinical trial including patients with minor trauma discharged from the emergency department (ED) with analgesic treatment. Patients were randomized to one of 3 groups, the control group, where patients received a phone call on day-7, the short message service (SMS) group, where patients received a daily text message to remind them to take their treatment during 7 days, and the mobile-phone based telemonitoring (TLM) group. Patients' adherence to analgesic treatments using the Morisky Medication Adherence Scale, current pain by using a visual analogue scale, and patients' satisfaction were assessed. For the TLM group, the assessment was performed at day-2, 4 and 7. RESULTS: Good adherence was observed in 418 patients (92.9%) in the TLM group versus 398 patients (88.6%) in the SMS group and 380 patients (84.8%) in the control group ( P <0.001). The factor mostly associated with adherence was telemonitoring (OR 2.40 95% CI 1.55-3.71). The decrease in pain visual analogue scale was highest in the TLM group compared with SMS and control groups ( P <0.001). The percentage of patients' satisfaction at 7 days post-ED discharge was 93% in the TLM group versus 88% in the SMS group and 84% in the standard group ( P =0.02). DISCUSSION: Our findings suggest that mobile-phone-based telemonitoring is beneficial in the treatment of pain in trauma patients after ED discharge. This approach improved patients' adherence and satisfaction.