The efficacy of intravenous lidocaine and its side effects in comparison with intravenous morphine sulfate in patients admitted to the ED with right upper abdominal pain suspected of biliary colic.

BACKGROUND: Intravenous (IV) Lidocaine can be used as analgesic in acute pain management in the emergency department (ED). OBJECTIVE: Efficacy of IV Lidocaine in comparison with IV morphine in acute pain management in the ED. METHOD: This is a double-blind randomized clinical trial on adult (18-64 year) patients with right upper abdominal pain suspected of biliary colic who needed pain management. Participants randomly received IV lidocaine (5 cc = 100 mg) or morphine sulfate (5 cc = 5 mg). In both groups, patients' pain scores were recorded and assessed by Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) at baseline, 10, 20, 30, 45, 60 and 120 min after drug administration. Adverse side effects of lidocaine and morphine sulfate and changes in vital signs were also recorded and compared. RESULTS: A total number of 104 patients were enrolled in the study, including 49 men and 55 women. IV lidocaine reduced pain in less time in comparison with morphine sulfate. Mean (±SD) basic pain score was 8.23 (±1.76) in the lidocaine group and 8.73 (±0.96) in the morphine group. Patients' mean (±SD) pain score in both groups had no significant difference during the study except that of NRS2 (10 min after drug administration), which was 5.05 (±2.69) in lidocaine group compared with 6.39 (±2.06) in the morphine group and NRS4 (30 min after drug administration), which was significantly lower (P-value = 0.01) in the morphine group [3.84(±1.73) vs 4.41(±2.82)]. Only 9 patients had adverse effects in either group. CONCLUSION: The findings of this study suggest that IV lidocaine can be a good choice in pain management in biliary colic and can reduce pain in less time than morphine sulfate (in 10 min) without adding significant side effects; however, our primary outcome was the comparison of these two drugs after 60 min of drug administration in pain reduction which showed no significant difference between two groups.

Intranasal ketamine reduces pain of digital nerve block; a double blind randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Low dose ketamine can be used as analgesic in acute pain management in the emergency department (ED). OBJECTIVE: Efficacy of IN ketamine in acute pain management in the ED. METHOD: This is a double blind randomized clinical trial on patients older than 15 years who needed digital nerve block (DNB). Participants randomly received IN Ketamine (1 ml = 50 mg) or placebo (normal saline, 1 ml) 5 min before DNB. In both groups, patients' pain score was recorded by visual analogue score (VAS) at baseline, after DNB and 45 min after completion of DNB. Adverse effects of ketamine and changes in vital signs were also recorded and compared with placebo group. RESULTS: A total number of 100 patients were enrolled in the study with the median (IQR) age of 36.5 (26) years, including 65 men and 35 women. IN ketamine resulted in less pain compared to placebo after performing DNB and 45 min after the procedure. Median (IQR) basic VAS score was 50 (15) in ketamine group, and 49 (27) in control group. Median (IQR) block pain VAS score was 28.5 (19) in ketamine group and 47.5 (31) in control group. Median (IQR) procedural pain VAS score was 21.5 (16) in ketamine group and 43.5 (29) in control group. Only 7 patients had adverse effects in either group. CONCLUSION: The findings of this study suggest that IN ketamine can be effective in reducing pain in patients with acute pain, without adding significant side effects.

External validation of the bedside score for the diagnosis of acute cholecystitis.

Objective: Acute cholecystitis usually presents with right upper quadrant (RUQ) abdominal pain. However, there are other conditions with similar findings which make the diagnosis difficult. The objective of this study is to prospectively validate the performance of the bedside score for the diagnosis of cholecystitis in patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with possible acute cholecystitis. Study design: We performed a prospective observational study of a convenience sample of patients with RUQ pain admitted to the ED of three academic hospitals. Symptoms (post prandial symptoms), physical signs (RUQ tenderness, murphy's sign) and ultrasound findings (Murphy's sign, gallstone, and gallbladder thickening) were scoring system items. The final diagnosis of cholecystitis was confirmed with a surgical pathology and/or discharge diagnosis of the patient in a 30-day follow-up. The treating physicians' clinical gestalt of acute cholecystitis was also assessed by 5-point Likert scale. Results: One hundred thirty patients were followed up and were included in the analysis. 42 patients (32 %) had cholecystitis. The bedside clinical score of less than 4 had a sensitivity of 100 % (CI95 %: 91.60 %-100 %), negative predictive value (NPV) of 100 % (CI 95 %: 41.35 %-63 %), and negative likelihood ratio (-LR) of 0. Score of 6 and above had a specificity of 90.91 % (CI 95 %: 82.87 %-95.99 %), positive predictive value (PPV) of 83.67 % (CI 95 %: 72.55 %-90.86 %), and positive likelihood ratio (+LR) of 10.74 (CI95 %: 5.54-20.83). Physicians' clinical gestalt at the scale of 4 and 5 showed a specificity of 95.45 % (CI 95 %: 88.77 %-98.75 %), PPV of 90.91 % (CI 95 %: 79.29 %-96.31 %), and +LR of 20.95 (CI95 %: 8.02-54.71). At the same time at the scale of 1 and 2, the sensitivity was 95.24 % (CI 95 %: 83.84 %-99.42 %), NPV was 97.22 % (CI 95 %: 90.01 %-99.27 %), and the -LR was 0.06 (CI 95 %: 0.02-0.423). The area under the curve of bedside clinical score was not significantly higher than clinical gestalt (97.58 (CI 95 %: 95.31-99.85) vs. 95.37 (CI 95: 99.24-100))(p-value = 0.35). Conclusion: This study showed while the bedside score would be helpful to rule out and rule in acute cholecystitis, physicians' gestalt had similar diagnostic performance.

The return visit, outcome and predicting factors of return visit among suspected COVID-19 outpatients.

Rate of return visit, predicting factors of return visit and occurrence of adverse events in suspected to be or likely cases of COVID-19 patients who received outpatient treatment. This is a retrospective observational cohort study on patients (> 16 years), suspected to be or likely cases of COVID-19 who were visited in a respiratory emergency department and subsequently discharged home. Patients' baseline characteristics were extracted from medical charts. All patients were followed-up for 7 days after their first visit. Patients' outcomes during the7-day follow-up, as well as the severity of pulmonary involvement based on imaging were recorded. A total number of 601 patients (350 men and 251 women) were recruited. The rate of return visit was 27.74% (144 patients) with 6.74% (34 patients) experiencing a poor outcome. Six factors with a significant odds ratio were predictors of poor outcome in patients who received outpatient treatment, namely, older age [odds ratio = 3.278, 95% confidence interval: 1.115-9.632], days from onset of symptoms [1.068, 1.003-1.137], and history of diabetes [6.373, 2.271-17.883]). Predictors of favorable outcome were female gender [0.376, 0.158-0.894], oxygen saturation > 93% [0.862, 0.733-1.014], smoking habit [0.204, 0.045-0.934]. The findings of this study demonstrate that the rate of return visit with poor outcome in patients who received outpatient treatment was reasonably low. Age, male sex, diabetes mellitus and pulmonary disease are predicting factors of poor outcome in these COVID-19 patients who received outpatient management.

A New Formula for Confirmation of Proper Endotracheal Tube Placement with Ultrasonography.

BACKGROUND: Endotracheal intubation is an important procedure in critical care and emergency medicine settings. Optimal depth of the tube placement has been a serious concern because of several complications associated with its malposition. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the current study was to find a new formula to estimate the proper endotracheal tube depth when using ultrasonography or lighted stylet device in order to increase the accuracy of determining Endotracheal tube (ETT) depth and decrease the side effects of ETT misplacement. METHOD: Patients older than 18 years of age admitted to Imam emergency department who needed tracheal intubation were included. Tube's length at the angle of the mouth while the tube passed the suprasternal notch, ETT depth after insertion and the distance from ETT's tip to carina were recorded. Ultrasonography and portable chest x-ray were used as tools for measuring these lengths. RESULTS: A total number of 91 patients including 55 men and 36 women were eligible for inclusion in the study. Not placing the tube at proper depth was considered as the failure of intubation. This failure rate was 9.9% in the standard method which would have been 1.1% if our proposed formula was used. CONCLUSION: The findings of this study suggest that the use of this new formula may help in predicting the proper intubation tube placement. Further studies are warranted to confirm these findings.

Atypical Presentation of Acute Appendicitis: A 32-year-old Man with Gastroenteritis Symptoms; an Educational Case.

INTRODUCTION: Appendicitis is a common condition that almost always requires emergency surgery. The diagnosis is clear when the patient presents with classic symptoms. However, presentation may be variable due to variations in the position and length of the appendix. CASE PRESENTATION: Here, we report a 32-year-old man who presented with diarrhea and lower abdominal pain. Physical examination revealed a generalized abdominal tenderness, more prominent in the lower abdomen, including the right and left quadrants. Abdominal ultrasound failed to show any findings supportive of the diagnosis of appendicitis. Further investigation with abdominopelvic computed tomography (CT) with intravenous and oral contrast revealed retrocecal appendicitis. The patient was discharged home after a non-complicated appendectomy. CONCLUSION: Emergency physicians should be aware that appendicitis may not always show up with a typical presentation and they should consider the possibility of appendicitis when evaluating an acute abdomen to prevent any delay in diagnosis of atypical presentations.

Jejunal Perforation Following Blunt Abdominal Trauma; a Case Report.

INTRODUCTION: The possibility of intestinal injury for all patients presenting to emergency department (ED) with blunt abdominal trauma, despite minimal physical signs should be considered. To highlight the patient management, hear, we report a case of hollow viscus injuries resulting from blunt abdominal trauma referring to a teaching hospital in Tehran, Iran. CASE PRESENTATION: A 30-year-old man presented to the ED after "falling into a hole" with his back and had direct blunt abdominal trauma by a heavy bag of cement. In physical examination, there was a mild abdominal tenderness on right upper quadrant. On bedside ultrasonography, there was small free fluid in his Morison's pouch without hypotension. So abdominal CT scan was performed which revealed free fluid in pelvic, perihepatic, and perisplenic spaces. Mural hematoma of proximal part of jejunum with mural wall hypodensity in mid jejunal loop were also revealed. The patient underwent surgery, and there was damage to the colon serosa and jejunal perforation which was primarily repaired. CONCLUSION: The presented case highlights the importance of obtaining history and physical exam and paying attention to the nature and mechanism of injury. Emergency physicians should be aware of hollow viscus injury in traumatic patients. Any delay in diagnosis and operative management are associated with an increase in mortality.