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.

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.

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.

Pulse amplitude ratio under noninvasive ventilation as a new method in the diagnosis of left heart failure in patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

BACKGROUND: Left heart failure (LHF) is commonly associated with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) but its role is often underestimated. AIM OF STUDY: To evaluate the performance of a new diagnostic technique based on the measurement of the pulse amplitude ratio (PAR) using non-invasive ventilation (NIV) for the early identification LHF in patients admitted to the emergency department (ED) for AECOPD. RESULTS: 73 patients were included in this study: 32 in LHF group and 41 in non LHF- group. The two groups had comparable demographic and clinical characteristics at admission. The mean values of PARNIV was significantly higher among LHF patients (0.86 vs. 0.71; p < 0.01). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of PARNIV was 0.75. Using the best cut-off (0.6), the sensitivity of PARNIV was 93% with a specificity 21%, a positive predictive value of 48%, and a negative predictive value of 81%. Correlation between PARNIV and BNP was significant (r = 0.52; p = 0.002). CONCLUSION: Measurement of PARNIV in patients presenting to the ED with AECOPD had a good diagnostic performance for the detection of LHF and could represent an interesting alternative for the currently available methods. Trial registration The study was registered in the Clinical Trial Registration System (clinicaltrials.gov) under the study number NCT05189119, https://register. CLINICALTRIALS: gov/prs/app/action/SelectProtocol?sid=S000BOO4&selectaction=Edit&uid=U0000QAM&ts=2&cx=qrmluh .

Twice-Daily Oral Zinc in the Treatment of Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Randomized Double-Blind Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Zinc supplementation has been considered a potential therapy for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We aimed to examine zinc efficacy in adult patients with COVID-19 infection. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled multicenter trial. Patients who were tested positive for COVID-19 without end-organ failure were randomized to oral zinc (n = 231) or matching placebo (n = 239) for 15 days. The primary combined outcome was death due to COVID-19 or intensive care unit (ICU) admission ≤30 days after randomization. Secondary outcomes included length of hospital stay for inpatients and duration of COVID-19 symptoms with COVID-19-related hospitalization for outpatients. RESULTS: 190 patients (40.4%) were ambulatory and 280 patients (59.6%) were hospitalized. Mortality at 30 days was 6.5% in the zinc group and 9.2% in the placebo group (OR: .68; 95% CI .34-1.35); ICU admission rates were, respectively, 5.2% and 11.3% (OR: .43; 95% CI .21-.87). Combined outcome was lower in the zinc group versus the placebo group (OR: .58; 95% CI .33-.99). Consistent results were observed in prespecified subgroups of patients aged <65 years, those with comorbidity, and those who needed oxygen therapy at baseline. Length of hospital stay was shorter in the zinc group versus the placebo group (difference: 3.5 days; 95% CI 2.76-4.23) in the inpatient group; duration of COVID-19 symptoms decreased with zinc treatment versus placebo in outpatients (difference: 1.9 days; 95% CI .62-2.6). No severe adverse events were observed during the study. CONCLUSIONS: Our results showed that, in COVID-19 patients, oral zinc can decrease 30-day death, ICU admission rate and can shorten symptom duration. Clinical Trials Registration. ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05212480.

Analgesic Effect of Topical Piroxicam vs Phytotherapy Gel in the Treatment of Acute Soft Tissue Injuries: A Randomized Controlled Noninferiority Study.

OBJECTIVE: The study compared the efficacy and tolerability of piroxicam gel and a new topical combination of medicinal plant products (Soulagel®; Belpharma Tunisia) to treat pain caused by soft tissue injuries. METHODS: Patients (n = 1,525) were assigned to receive piroxicam gel or Soulagel. Efficacy assessments included a change of at least 50% in the pain-on-movement visual numeric scale rating from emergency department discharge (baseline) to day 7 final assessment, as well as the time required to reach pain resolution criteria, the need for rescue analgesia, patients' satisfaction, and the rate of adverse effects. RESULTS: At day 7, 1,216 patients (79.7%) achieved at least 50% reduction in visual numeric scale rating from baseline: 623 patients (82.4%) in the Soulagel group vs 593 patients (77.1%) in the piroxicam group (P = 0.01). Time to decrease pain on movement by 50% was significantly higher with piroxicam gel than with Soulagel (34 ± 1 vs 33 ± 1 days, respectively; P = 0.54). At day 7, 96.4% of patients in the Soulagel group declared being "very satisfied" to "satisfied," vs 68% in the piroxicam group (P < 0.001). There were no major adverse events in either group. CONCLUSIONS: Soulagel is not inferior to piroxicam gel for managing pain related to a soft tissue injuries. Further studies will help ascertain whether this new gel offers an alternative treatment option for this common emergency department condition.

Appropriateness of antibiotic treatment of acute respiratory tract infections in Tunisian primary care and emergency departments: a multicenter cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the pattern and appropriateness of antibiotic prescriptions in patients with acute respiratory tract infections (ARTIs). OBJECTIVE: Describe the antibiotics used to treat ARTIs in Tunisian primary care offices and emergency departments (EDs), and assess the appropriateness of their use. METHODS: It was a prospective multicenter cross-sectional observational clinical study conducted at 63 primary care offices and 6 EDS during a period of 8 months. Appropriateness of antibiotic prescription was evaluated by trained physicians using the medication appropriateness index (MAI). The MAI ratings generated a weighted score of 0 to 18 with higher scores indicating low appropriateness. The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and national and institutional standards. The study was approved by the Ethics committee of Monastir Medical Faculty. RESULTS: From the 12,880 patients screened we included 9886 patients. The mean age was 47.4, and 55.4% were men. The most frequent diagnosis of ARTI was were acute bronchitis (45.3%), COPD exacerbation (16.3%), tonsillitis (14.6%), rhinopharyngitis (12.2%) and sinusitis (11.5%). The most prescribed classes of antibiotics were penicillins (58.3%), fluoroquinolones (17.6%), and macrolides (16.9%). Antibiotic therapy was inappropriate in 75.5% of patients of whom 65.2% had bronchitis. 65% of patients had one or more antibiotic prescribing inappropriateness criteria as assessed by the MAI. The most frequently rated criteria were with expensiveness (75.8%) and indication (40%). Amoxicillin-clavulanic acid and levofloxacin were the most inappropriately prescribed antibiotics. History of cardiac ischemia ([OR] 3.66; 95% [CI] 2.17-10.26; p < 0.001), asthma ([OR] 3.29, 95% [CI] 1.77-6.13; p < 0.001), diabetes ([OR] 2.09, 95% [CI] 1.54-2.97; p = 0.003), history of COPD ([OR] 1.75, 95% [CI] 1.43-2.15; p < 0.001) and age > 65 years (Odds Ratio [OR] 1.35, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.16-1.58; p < 0.001) were associated with a higher likelihood of inappropriate prescribing. CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate a high inappropriate use of antibiotics in ARTIs treated in in primary care and EDs. This was mostly related to antibiotic prescription in acute bronchitis and overuse of expensive broad spectrum antibiotics. Future interventions to improve antibiotic prescribing in primary care and EDs is needed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: the trial is registered at Clinicaltrials.gov registry (NCT04482231).

Two-day versus seven-day course of levofloxacin in acute COPD exacerbation: a randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Duration of antibiotic treatment in acute exacerbation of COPD (AECOPD) is most commonly based on expert opinion. Typical administration periods range from 5 to 7 days. A 2-day course with levofloxacin was not previously assessed. We performed a randomized clinical trial to evaluate the efficacy of 2-day versus 7-day treatment with levofloxacin in patients with AECOPD. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Patients with AECOPD were randomized to receive levofloxacin for 2 days and 5 days placebo (n = 155) or levofloxacin for 7 days (n = 155). All patients received a common dose of intravenous prednisone daily for 5 days. The primary outcome measure was cure rate, and secondary outcomes included need for additional antibiotics, ICU admission rate, re-exacerbation rate, death rate, and exacerbation-free interval (EFI) within 1-year follow-up. The study protocol has been prepared in accordance with the revised Helsinki Declaration for Biomedical Research Involving Human Subjects and Guidelines for Good Clinical Practice. The study was approved by ethics committees of all participating centers prior to implementation (Monastir and Sousse Universities). RESULTS: 310 patients were randomized to receive 2-day course of levofloxacin (n = 155) or 7-day course (n = 155). Cure rate was 79.3% (n = 123) and 74.2% (n = 115), respectively, in 2-day and 7-day groups [OR 1.3; 95% CI 0.78-2.2 (p = 0.28)]. Need for additional antibiotics rate was 3.2% and 1.9% in the 2-day group and 7-day group, respectively; (p = 0.43). ICU admission rate was not significantly different between both groups. One-year re-exacerbation rate was 34.8% (n = 54) in 2-day group versus 29% (n = 45) in 7-day group (p = 0.19); the EFI was 121 days (interquartile range, 99-149) versus 110 days (interquartile range, 89-132) in 2-day and 7-day treatment groups, respectively; (p = 0.73). One-year death rate was not significantly different between the 2 groups, 5.2% versus 7.1% in the 2-day group and 7-day group, respectively; (p = 0.26). No difference in adverse effects was detected. CONCLUSION: Levofloxacin once daily for 2 days is not inferior to 7 days with respect to cure rate, need for additional antibiotics and hospital readmission in AECOPD. Our findings would improve patient compliance and reduce the incidence of bacterial resistance and adverse effects.

30 day predicted outcome in undifferentiated chest pain: multicenter validation of the HEART score in Tunisian population.

BACKGROUND: Chest pain remains one of the most challenging serious complaints in the emergency department (ED). A prompt and accurate risk stratification tool for chest pain patients is paramount to help physcian effectively progrnosticate outcomes. HEART score is considered one of the best scores for chest pain risk stratification. However, most validation studies of HEART score were not performed in populations different from those included in the original one. OBJECTIVE: To validate HEART score as a prognostication tool, among Tunisian ED patients with undifferentiated chest pain. METHODS: Our prospective, multicenter study enrolled adult patients presenting with chest pain at chest pain units. Patients over 30 years of age with a primary complaint of chest pain were enrolled. HEART score was calculated for every patient. The primary outcome was major cardiovascular events (MACE) occurrence, including all-cause mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), and coronary revascularisation over 30 days following the ED visit. The discriminative power of HEART score was evaluated by the area under the ROC curve. A calibration analysis of the HEART score in this population was performed using Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness of test. RESULTS: We enrolled 3880 patients (age 56.3; 59.5% males). The application of HEART score showed that most patients were in intermediate risk category (55.3%). Within 30 days of ED visit, MACE were reported in 628 (16.2%) patients, with an incidence of 1.2% in the low risk group, 10.8% in the intermediate risk group and 62.4% in the high risk group. The area under receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.87 (95% CI 0.85-0.88). HEART score was not well calibrated (χ2 statistic = 12.34; p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: HEART score showed a good discrimination performance in predicting MACE occurrence at 30 days for Tunisian patients with undifferentiated acute chest pain. Heart score was not well calibrated in our population.

Value of nitroglycerin test in the diagnosis of heart failure in emergency department patients with undifferentiated dyspnea.

BACKGROUND: Rapid diagnosis of heart failure (HF) in acutely dyspneic patients can be challenging for emergency department (ED) physicians. HYPOTHESIS: Cardiac output (CO) change with sublingual nitroglycerin (NTG) could be helpful in the diagnosis of HF in patients with acute undifferentiated dyspnea. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective study of patients >18 years admitted to the ED for acute dyspnea. Using thoracic bioimpedance, we measured CO change at baseline and after sublingual administration of 0.6 mg of NTG. HF was defined on the basis of clinical examination, pro-brain natriuretic peptide levels, and echocardiographic findings. Diagnostic performance of delta CO was calculated by sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratio and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. RESULTS: This study included 184 patients with mean age of 64 years. Baseline CO was comparable between the HF group and the non-HF group. At its best cutoff (29%), delta CO showed good accuracy in the diagnosis of HF with a sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratios of 80%, 44%, 57%, and 66% respectively. Area under ROC curve was 0.701 [95% CI 0.636-0.760]. The decrease of CO with sublingual NTG was significantly higher in patients with HFpEF compared with those with HFrEF. Multivariate analysis, showed that delta CO was an independent factor associated with HF diagnosis [OR 0.19 (95% CI 0.11-0.29); p < .001]. CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed that CO change with sublingual nitroglycerin is a simple tool that may be helpful for the diagnosis of HF in ED patients with undifferentiated dyspnea.

Value of Dynamic Variation of Impedance Cardiac output in the diagnosis of Heart Failure in emergency department patients with undifferentiated dyspnea.

AIM OF STUDY: Cardiac output (CO) responses to acute changes in body position and Valsalva maneuver (VM) were proposed to assess cardiac contractile reserve. We investigated the value of sitting position (SP), leg raising (LR), and VM for identifying heart failure (HF) in patients with undifferentiated dyspnea. MATERIALS AND METHODS: It is a prospective study including patients over 18 years old admitted to the emergency department (ED) for dyspnea. Bioimpedance CO was measured at baseline, under SP, LR, and VM. HF diagnosis was based on clinical assessment, serum levels of brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) and echocardiography findings. Study population was divided into patients with heart failure (HF group) and patients without HF (HF- group). Diagnostic performance of CO change under the three maneuvers was calculated by sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratio and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. RESULTS: 290 patients were enrolled in the study. The final diagnosis was dyspnea due to congestive heart failure in 147 patients (50.7%). CO change with VM was the most accurate exam in identifying congestive heart failure as the cause of dyspnea with a sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratios of 79%, 60%, 1.97, and 0.36 respectively. Area under ROC curve was 0.62(95% CI, 0.55-0.69), 0.63(95% CI, 0.56-0.69), and 0.70(95% CI, 0.64-0.76) respectively for SP, LR, and VM. In a multivariate analysis, CO change with VM, but not with SP or LR, carried independent diagnostic value (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: the diagnosis of HF can be aided with use of analyzing the effect of VM on non-invasively measured CO among patients admitted to the ED with undifferentiated dyspnea. Diagnostic yield of SP and LR was poor.

Bedside lung ultrasonography by emergency department residents as an aid for identifying heart failure in patients with acute dyspnea after a 2-h training course.

BACKGROUND: Ultrasonographic B-lines have recently emerged as a bedside imaging tool for the differential diagnosis of acute dyspnea in the Emergency Department (ED). However, despite its simplicity, LUS has not fully penetrated emergency department. This study aimed to assess the accuracy and reproducibility of ultrasonographic B-lines performed by emergency medicine (EM) residents for the diagnosis of congestive heart failure (CHF) in patients admitted to ED for acute dyspnea. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This is a cross-sectional prospective study conducted between January 2016 and October 2017 including patients aged over 18 years admitted to ED for acute dyspnea. At admission, two consecutive bedside LUS study were performed by a pair of EM residents who received a 2-h course for recognition of sonographic B-lines to determine independently B-lines score and B-profile pattern. All participating sonographers were blinded to patients' clinical data. B-lines score ≥ 15 or a B-profile pattern was considered as suggestive of CHF. The final leading diagnosis was assessed by two expert sonographers, who were blinded to the residents' interpretations, based on clinical findings, chest X-ray, brain natriuretic peptide, cardiac and lung ultrasound testing. Accuracy and agreement of B-lines score and B-profile pattern were calculated. RESULTS: We included 700 patients with a mean age of 68 ± 12.6 years and a sex ratio (M/F) of 1.43. The diagnosis of CHF was recorded in 371 patients (53%). The diagnostic performance of B-lines score at a cut-off 15 and B-profile pattern was, respectively, 88% and 82.5% for sensitivity, 75% and 84% for specificity, 80% and 85% for positive predictive value, 84% and 81% for negative predictive value. The area under receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.86 [0.83-0.89] and 0.83 [0.80-0.86], respectively, for B-lines score and B-profile pattern. There was an excellent agreement between residents for the diagnosis of CHF using both scores (kappa = 0.81 and 0.85, respectively, for ordinal scale B-lines score and B-profile pattern). CONCLUSION: Lung ultrasound B-lines assessment has a good accuracy and an excellent reproducibility in the diagnosis of CHF in the hand of EM residents following a short training program. Trial registration Name of the registry: clinicaltrials.gov; Trial registration number: NCT03717779; Date of registration: October 24, 2018 'Retrospectively registered'; URL of trial registry record: clinicaltrials.gov.

Acetaminophen, Nonsteroidal Anti-inflammatory Drugs, or Combination of Both Analgesics in Acute Posttrauma Pain: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVES: Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and acetaminophen (also called paracetamol) are the most frequent analgesics used to relieve posttrauma pain in the emergency department (ED). However, the utility of combining both treatments is still controversial. We sought to explore the benefits of combining an NSAID with acetaminophen compared to acetaminophen alone, or NSAID alone, in the treatment of posttraumatic pain of the extremity after discharge from the ED. METHODS: This is a prospective, randomized controlled trial, carried out in a single ED from March 2017 to November 2018. The included patients were randomly assigned to receive paracetamol alone, high-dose NSAID (piroxicam) alone, or a combination of paracetamol and high-dose NSAID for 7 days after ED discharge. The primary outcome was need for additional oral analgesics. Secondary outcomes included the change of the visual numeric scale (VNS) between ED discharge (VNS D0) and 7 days later (VNS D7), ED revisits for residual pain, side effects, and patient satisfaction as assessed by a Likert satisfaction scale. RESULTS: The need for additional oral analgesics was comparable between the paracetamol-NSAID combination group (9.8%) and the paracetamol group (11.4%; p = 0.43). ED readmission rate was also comparable between the two groups at 5.6 and 5.8%, respectively (p = 0.86). In contrast, need for new analgesics and ED revisit rates were both more frequent in the high-dose NSAID group. Mean VNS decreases on day 7 compared to day 0 were 66, 63, and 67%, respectively, in the paracetamol, NSAID, and paracetamol-NSAID combination groups (p = 0.32). Frequency of dissatisfaction was higher in the NSAID group. Side effects were more frequent in the NSAID and paracetamol-NSAID combination groups. CONCLUSION: This study found that the combination of a high-dose NSAID with paracetamol does not increase the analgesic effect compared to paracetamol alone. We also found that paracetamol alone is superior to high-dose NSAID alone for posttraumatic extremity pain.

Safety of diuretic administration during the early management of dyspnea patients who are not finally diagnosed with acute heart failure.

OBJECTIVES: Investigating whether it is safe or not to administrate diuretics to patients arriving at emergency departments in a stage of acute dyspnea but without a final diagnosis of acute heart failure. METHODS: We analyzed an unselected multinational sample of patients with dyspnea without a final diagnosis of acute heart failure from Global Research on Acute Conditions Team (France, Lithuania, Tunisia) and Basics in Acute Shortness of Breath Evaluation (Switzerland) registries. Thirty-day all-cause mortality and 30-day postdischarge all-cause readmission rate of treated patients with diuretics at emergency departments were compared with untreated patients by unadjusted and adjusted hazard and odds ratios. Interaction and stratified analyses were performed. RESULTS: We included 2505 patients. Among them, 365 (14.6%) received diuretics in emergency departments. Thirty-day mortality was 4.5% (treated/untreated = 5.2%/4.3%, hazard ratio: 1.22; 95% confidence interval, 0.75-2.00) and 30-day readmission rate was 11.3% (14.7%/10.8%, odds ratio: 1.41; 95% confidence interval, 0.95-2.11). After adjustment, no differences were found between two groups in mortality (hazard ratio: 0.86; 95% confidence interval, 0.51-1.44) and readmission (odds ratio: 1.15; 95% confidence interval, 0.72-1.82). Age significantly interacted with the use of diuretics and readmission (P = 0.03), with better prognosis when used in patients >80 years (odds ratio: 0.27; 95% confidence interval, 0.07-1.03) than in patients ≤80 years (odds ratio: 1.56; 95% confidence interval, 0.94-2.63). CONCLUSIONS: Diuretic administration to patients presenting to emergency departments with dyspnea while they were undiagnosed and in whom acute heart failure was finally excluded was not associated with 30-day all-cause mortality and 30-day postdischarge all-cause readmission rate.

Effect on Opioids Requirement of Early Administration of Intranasal Ketamine for Acute Traumatic Pain.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of early administration of low-dose intranasal ketamine on reducing the need for opioid and nonopioid analgesic agents in emergency department (ED) patients with acute moderate to severe acute limbs' trauma pain. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This is a double-blind, randomized, prospective, controlled study conducted in the ED. The included patients were randomly assigned to intranasal pulverization of ketamine or placebo. Protocol treatment was given at the triage. The primary outcome is the need for opioids during ED stay. Secondary outcome included the requirement of nonopioid analgesic agents and the percentage of patients discharged from the ED with a visual analog scale (VAS) <30. A combined outcome score including the 3 outcome items was constructed. RESULTS: The authors included 1102 patients, 550 patients in the placebo group, and 552 in the intranasal ketamine group. The groups were similar regarding demographics, clinical characteristics, and baseline VAS. The need for opioids was decreased in the intranasal ketamine group compared with the placebo group (17.2% vs. 26.5%; P<0.001). The need for nonopioid analgesics was significantly lower in the intranasal ketamine group compared with the placebo group (31.1% vs. 39.6%; P=0.003). The percentage of patients discharged with a VAS score <30 was significantly higher in the intranasal ketamine group (P<0.001). The mean combined outcome score was 0.97 in the placebo group and 0.67 in the intranasal ketamine group (P<0.001). CONCLUSION: Intranasal ketamine administered early in the triage was associated with a decrease in opioids and nonopioid analgesics need in patients with acute limb trauma-related pain.

Effect on Morphine Requirement of Early Administration of Oral Acetaminophen vs. Acetaminophen/Tramadol Combination in Acute Pain.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effect on opioid requirement of pain treatment starting at triage, and to evaluate satisfaction in emergency department (ED) patients with acute pain. METHODS: This is a single-blind, randomized, prospective study conducted in the ED. The included patients were randomly assigned to single oral doses of placebo, acetaminophen, or a tramadol/acetaminophen combination. Protocol treatment was given at triage. The primary outcome was the need for rescue morphine during ED stay. The secondary outcome included patient satisfaction, ED length of stay, and percentage of patients discharged from the ED with a VAS score of <30. RESULTS: We included 1,485 patients: 496 patients in the placebo group, 497 in the acetaminophen group, and 492 in the tramadol/acetaminophen combination group. The groups were similar regarding demographic and clinical characteristics and baseline VAS pain scores. Rescue morphine was significantly decreased in the tramadol/acetaminophen combination group compared to that in the placebo and acetaminophen groups (11.5%, 23.2%, and 18.9%, respectively; P = 0.03). Patient satisfaction was higher in the tramadol/acetaminophen combination group (77% vs. 69% in the acetaminophen group and 68% in the placebo group). A VAS score of <30 was observed in 84% of patients in the placebo group, 83% in the acetaminophen group, and 87% in the tramadol/acetaminophen combination group (P = 0.01 between the acetaminophen group and tramadol/acetaminophen combination group). The ED length of stay was 60 minutes for the acetaminophen group and tramadol/acetaminophen combination group and 71 minutes for the placebo group (P = 0.04). CONCLUSION: Oral tramadol/acetaminophen combination administered early in triage was associated with a decrease in intravenous morphine requirement and increase in satisfaction among ED patients with acute pain when compared with patients taking acetaminophen. No significant increase in side effects was found. This intervention may be considered in EDs with an aim of similar benefits.

Low-dose Magnesium Sulfate Versus High Dose in the Early Management of Rapid Atrial Fibrillation: Randomized Controlled Double-blind Study (LOMAGHI Study).

OBJECTIVES: We aim to determine the benefit of two different doses magnesium sulfate (MgSO4 ) compared to placebo in rate control of rapid atrial fibrillation (AF) managed in the emergency department (ED). METHODS: We undertook a randomized, controlled, double-blind clinical trial in three university hospital EDs between August 2009 and December 2014. Patients > 18 years with rapid AF (>120 beats/min) were enrolled and randomized to 9 g of intravenous MgSO4 (high-dose group, n = 153), 4.5 g of intravenous MgSO4 (low-dose group, n = 148), or serum saline infusion (placebo group, n = 149), given in addition to atrioventricular (AV) nodal blocking agents. The primary outcome was the reduction of baseline ventricular rate (VR) to 90 beats/min or less or reduction of VR by 20% or greater from baseline (therapeutic response). Secondary outcome included resolution time (defined as the elapsed time from start of treatment to therapeutic response), sinus rhythm conversion rate, and adverse events within the first 24 hours. RESULTS: At 4 hours, therapeutic response rate was higher in low- and high-MgSO4 groups compared to placebo group; the absolute differences were, respectively, 20.5% (risk ratio [RR] = 2.31, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.45-3.69) and +15.8% (RR = 1.89, 95% CI = 1.20-2.99). At 24 hours, compared to placebo group, therapeutic response difference was +14.1% (RR = 9.74, 95% CI = 2.87-17.05) with low-dose MgSO4 and +10.3% (RR = 3.22, 95% CI = 1.45-7.17) with high-dose MgSO4 . The lowest resolution time was observed in the low-dose MgSO4 group (5.2 ± 2 hours) compared to 6.1 ± 1.9 hours in the high-dose MgSO4 group and 8.4 ± 2.5 hours in the placebo group. Rhythm control rate at 24 hours was significantly higher in the low-dose MgSO4 group (22.9%) compared to the high-dose MgSO4 group (13.0%, p = 0.03) and the placebo group (10.7%). Adverse effects were minor and significantly more frequent with high-dose MgSO4 . CONCLUSIONS: Intravenous MgSO4 appears to have a synergistic effect when combined with other AV nodal blockers resulting in improved rate control. Similar efficacy was observed with 4.5 and 9 g of MgSO4 but a dose of 9 g was associated with more side effects.