Factors associated with door-in-door-out times in large vessel occlusion stroke patients undergoing endovascular therapy.

INTRODUCTION: In the management of large vessel occlusion stroke (LVOS), patients are frequently evaluated first at a non-endovascular stroke center and later transferred to an endovascular stroke center (ESC) for endovascular treatment (EVT). The door-in-door-out time (DIDO) is frequently used as a benchmark for transferring hospitals though there is no universally accepted nor evidenced-based DIDO time. The goal of this study was to identify factors affecting DIDO times in LVOS patients who ultimately underwent EVT. METHODS: The Optimizing Prehospital Use of Stroke Systems of Care-Reacting to Changing Paradigms (OPUS-REACH) registry is comprised of all LVOS patients who underwent EVT at one of nine endovascular centers in the Northeast United States between 2015 and 2020. We queried the registry for all patients who were transferred from a non-ESC to one of the nine ESCs for EVT. Univariate analysis was performed using t-tests to obtain a p value. A priori, we defined a p value of <0.05 as significant. Multiple logistic regression was conducted to determine the association of variables to estimate an odds ratio. RESULTS: 511 patients were included in the final analysis. The mean DIDO times for all patients was 137.8 min. Vascular imaging and treatment at a non-certified stroke center were associated with longer DIDO times by 23 and 14 min, respectively. On multivariate analyses, the acquisition of vascular imaging was associated with 16 additional minutes spent at the non-ESC while presentation to a non-stroke certified hospital was associated with 20 additional minutes spent at the transferring hospital. The administration of intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) was associated with 15 min less spent at the non-ESC. DISCUSSION: Vascular imaging and non-stroke certified stroke centers were associated with longer DIDO times. Non-ESCs should integrate vascular imaging into their workflow as feasible to reduce DIDO times. Further work examining other details regarding the transfer process such as transfer via ground or air, could help further identify opportunities to improve DIDO times.

Evolution of endovascular stroke centers and disparities in access to stroke care in four Northeastern states: 2015-2019.

OBJECTIVES: Disparities exist throughout our healthcare system, especially related to access to care. Advanced stroke care for strokes is only available at selected endovascular centers (ESCs) in the United States. Although the number of ESCs increase each year, this does not necessarily reflect increased access to care. Here, we look at the evolution of ESC in four states and disparities in access to advanced stroke care. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a descriptive study of access to ESCs in four Northeastern states between 2015-2019. Using data from the United States Census Bureau and spatial analysis, we examined the proportion of the population with drive times of less than 60 minutes stratified by income, race/ethnicity, population density, and insurance. We also calculated the mean drive time for each of these socioeconomic groups from their census tracts to the nearest ESC. RESULTS: Between 2015 and 2019, the number of ESCs increased from 15 to 48. The proportion of patients within a 60-minute drive of an ESC increased from 77% to 88%. However, only 66% of the least densely populated quartile lived within 60 min of an ESC. By income, access to ESCs in the wealthiest quartile was 96.6% compared to 83.7% in the lowest quartile. Hispanics and non-Hispanic Blacks had the largest proportions of populations within 60 minutes of an ESC while Non-Hispanic Whites had the smallest. CONCLUSIONS: This study underscores the need to evaluate the placement of new ESCs to assure that these hospitals decrease disparities and increase access to advanced stroke care.

Optimizing Prehospital Stroke Systems of Care-Reacting to Changing Paradigms (OPUS-REACH): a pragmatic registry of large vessel occlusion stroke patients to create evidence-based stroke systems of care and eliminate disparities in access to stroke care.

BACKGROUND: Large vessel occlusion (LVO) strokes are best treated with rapid endovascular therapy (EVT). There are two routes that LVO stroke patients can take to EVT therapy when transported by EMS: primary transport (ambulance transports directly to an endovascular stroke center (ESC) or secondary transport (EMS transports to a non-ESC then transfers for EVT). There is no clear evidence which path to care results in better functional outcomes for LVO stroke patients. To find this answer, an analysis of a large, real-world population of LVO stroke patients must be performed. METHODS: A pragmatic registry of LVO stroke patients from nine health systems across the United States. The nine health systems span urban and rural populations as well as the spectrum of socioeconomic statuses. We will use univariate and multivariate analysis to explore the relationships between type of EMS transport, socioeconomic factors, and LVO stroke outcomes. We will use geographic information systems and spatial analysis to examine the complex movements of patients in time and space. To detect an 8% difference between groups, with a 3:1 patient ratio of primary to secondary transports, 95% confidence and 80% power, we will need approximately 1600 patients. The primary outcome is the patients with modified Rankin Scale (mRS) ≤ 2 at 90 days. Subgroup analyses include patients who receive intravenous thrombolysis and duration of stroke systems. Secondary analyses include socioeconomic factors associated with poor outcomes after LVO stroke. DISCUSSION: Using the data obtained from the OPUS-REACH registry, we will develop evidence based algorithms for prehospital transport of LVO stroke patients. Unlike prior research, the OPUS-REACH registry contains patient-level data spanning from EMS dispatch to ninety day functional outcomes. We expect that we will find modifiable factors and socioeconomic disparities associated with poor outcomes in LVO stroke. OPUS-REACH with its breadth of locations, detailed patient records, and multidisciplinary researchers will design the optimal prehospital stroke system of care for LVO stroke patients.

Ultrasound in Emergency MedicinePoint-of-Care Ultrasound (POCUS) for Isolated Pediatric Dysuria: An Unusual Presentation of Acute Appendicitis.

BACKGROUND: Isolated complaint of dysuria in an adolescent is a rare presentation for acute perforated appendicitis. Acute appendicitis typically involves vague periumbical pain that migrates to the right lower quadrant, associated with pain, nausea, and loss of appetite. There have been case reports of associated pyuria and dysuria in addition to classical symptoms, but to our knowledge, this is the first case with isolated dysuria presenting to an emergency department (ED). CASE REPORT: A 14-year-old boy presented to the ED with 3 days of dysuria and subsequent sensation of urinary retention. Urine dip showed occult blood without white cells or nitrites. A bedside renal/bladder point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) did not show evidence of obstruction. However, it did reveal a retrovesicular fluid collection with an echogenic foci inside suspicious for abscess, likely secondary to ruptured appendicitis. This diagnosis was confirmed with a dedicated right lower quadrant ultrasound, with resultant treatment with i.v. antibiotics and eventual surgical resection of the appendix. WHY SHOULD AN EMERGENCY PHYSICIAN BE AWARE OF THIS?: Pediatric and adolescent patients may present with extremely atypical symptoms of a common disease process. In this case, early use of POCUS in the ED helped to quickly identify an acute surgical process and focus diagnostic and therapeutic interventions.

Intravenous Cetirizine Versus Intravenous Diphenhydramine for the Treatment of Acute Urticaria: A Phase III Randomized Controlled Noninferiority Trial.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Acute urticaria is a frequent presentation in emergency departments (EDs), urgent care centers, and other clinical arenas. Treatment options are limited if diphenhydramine is the only intravenous antihistamine offered because of its short duration of action and well-known adverse effects. We evaluate cetirizine injection, the first second-generation injectable antihistamine, for acute urticaria in this multicenter, randomized, noninferiority, phase 3 clinical trial. METHODS: Adult patients presenting to EDs and urgent care centers with acute urticaria requiring an intravenous antihistamine were randomized to either intravenous cetirizine 10 mg or intravenous diphenhydramine 50 mg. The primary endpoint was the 2-hour pruritus score change from baseline, with time spent in treatment center and rate of return to treatment centers as key secondary endpoints. Frequency of sedation and anticholinergic adverse effects were also recorded. RESULTS: Among 262 enrolled patients, the 2-hour pruritus score change from baseline for intravenous cetirizine was statistically noninferior to that for intravenous diphenhydramine (-1.6 versus -1.5; 95% confidence interval -0.1 to 0.3), and in favor of cetirizine. Treatment differences also favored cetirizine for mean time spent in treatment center (1.7 versus 2.1 hours; P=.005), return to treatment center (5.5% versus 14.1%; P=.02), lower change from baseline sedation score at 2 hours (0.1 versus 0.5; P=.03), and adverse event rate (3.9% versus 13.3%). CONCLUSION: Intravenous cetirizine is an effective alternative to intravenous diphenhydramine for treating acute urticaria, with benefits of less sedation, fewer adverse events, shorter time spent in treatment center, and lower rates of revisit to treatment center.

A Case of Burning Throat Pain.

BACKGROUND: Throat pain is a common complaint in the emergency department. The related diagnoses are varied, from simple gastroesophageal reflux disease to catastrophic aortic dissection. This case highlights the importance of pertinent patient history and frequent reassessments in order to recognize the latter. CASE REPORT: A 58-year-old woman was found to have a type A aortic dissection after initially presenting to the emergency department with a chief complaint of "burning" throat pain. Throughout the patient's evaluation in the emergency department, her symptoms evolved from the complaint of mild throat pain and water brash to development of chest pain and sudden right lower extremity cramping. Her history of hypertension, smoking, and a previous cerebral aneurysm prompted further intervention, including aggressive blood pressure control and emergent imaging. A computed tomography scan with angiography revealed the diagnosis of a type A aortic dissection. WHY SHOULD AN EMERGENCY PHYSICIAN BE AWARE OF THIS?: We highlight the importance of recognizing that patient presentation may change throughout the course of the emergency department stay, and that our case represents an atypical presentation of serious disease.

Structures and Rotational Barriers of a Diiodobinorsnoutane: Energetic Preference for Gauche Conformation.

The diiodobinorsnoutane, bi(5-iodopentacyclo[4.3.0.0(2,4).0(3,8).0(5,7)]non-4-yl) (5), exists in a sterically hindered gauche conformation rather than an anti or an averaged (freely rotating) C2v structure. Density functional theory (DFT) predictions place the gauche conformation 11 kcal/mol more stable than the anti conformation with a barrier of 17 kcal/mol connecting the minima. These are consistent with variable-temperature NMR (17.1 ± 0.8 kcal/mol) estimates and X-ray analysis. Predictions of the torsional profiles of the yet-unsynthesized bromo-, chloro-, and fluoro- analogues show a progressive lowering of the barriers.

The use of inhaled nitrous oxide for analgesia in adult ED patients: a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Oligoanalgesia challenges emergency department (ED) health care providers and remains an area of patient dissatisfaction. Nitrous oxide (NO) is a safe, quick-acting, and well-tolerated sedative agent with analgesic and anxiolytic properties that make it ideal for ED use. OBJECTIVES: We seek to test the effectiveness of a self-administered and self-contained NO device as an analgesic agent in the ED and assess patient and staff satisfaction with this method. METHODS: We enrolled 85 patients 18 years and older in a prospective observational study of patients presenting to the ED with moderate to severe pain (≥30 mm on a 100-mm visual analog scale). Subjects received a mixture of 50% NO via a self-administered portable delivery device. Primary outcome was the reduction in baseline pain scores at 20, 40, and 60 minutes. Secondary outcomes were patient, nurse, and physician satisfaction as reported on a brief satisfaction questionnaire. RESULTS: There was a significant reduction in mean pain scores from baseline to 20 minutes that was sustained through the 60-minute period. Most subjects (93%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 85%-97%) and nurses (97%; 95% CI, 90%-99%) reported that the NO delivery system was easy to use and were satisfied with the level of pain relief and would use NO in the future (82%; 95% CI, 73%-89%). Physicians and nurses were also satisfied with the analgesic effects of NO (82%; 95% CI, 73%-89%). CONCLUSIONS: The portable NO device is an effective analgesia adjunct for ED patients presenting with painful conditions, and patients, ED nurses, and emergency physicians are satisfied with its use. Nitrous oxide coupled with a nurse-driven analgesia protocol may provide a novel solution for improvement in ED analgesia rates and overall patient satisfaction with ED pain management.

Comparison of the NIO and EZIO for Resuscitative Vascular Access in the Emergency Department: A Quasi-Experimental, Before-and-After Study.

INTRODUCTION: Intraosseous (IO) needle insertion is a key adjunctive procedure in the care of critically ill and injured patients in a variety of settings, including the battlefield. The NIO is a new, fully disposable, single-piece, IO device with potential practical advantages under austere conditions. We sought to compare the efficacy and safety of the NIO to an established, well-studied device, the EZIO, when used for resuscitative vascular access in the emergency department (ED). METHODS: Retrospective, single-center, quasi-experimental, before-and-after, observational cohort study performed at an urban, tertiary-care hospital ED among adult patients receiving IO access during resuscitation. The before/NIO period lasted from July 1, 2019, to May 31, 2020, and the EZIO/after period from June 1, 2020, to April 30, 2021. Patient demographics, prehospital treatment, ED presentation, characteristics and results of IO insertion(s), potential procedure-associated adverse events, and ED and hospital outcomes were abstracted from the medical record. The primary outcome, rate of first-pass success (FPS), was compared between the NIO and EZIO periods using multivariable regression after adjustment for potential confounding factors. RESULTS: We enrolled 63 total patients/66 limbs (mean age 61 ± 18, 51% female), 34 patients/35 limbs during the NIO period and 29 patients/31 limbs during the EZIO period. The most common reason for IO insertion was cardiac arrest (40/63, 63%), followed by respiratory failure, trauma, and sepsis. The majority of IO insertions were performed at the proximal tibia (58/66, 88%) by senior emergency medicine residents or faculty. The overall rate of FPS was 53/66 (80%), 24/35 (69%) with the NIO compared to 29/31 (94%) with the EZIO. After multivariable modeling, the odds of FPS with the NIO vs. the EZIO was 0.19 (95% CI, 0.01-1.5, P = .16). Procedure-related adverse events were infrequent in both groups. In-hospital mortality was 45/63 (71%). CONCLUSIONS: We found that the NIO device was associated with a lower-than-expected rate of FPS compared to the EZIO device, although not significantly different after adjusting for between-group imbalances and considering limitations in the study design. Further, prospective research into the efficacy and safety of the NIO is needed before clinical use can be encouraged.

Interprofessional Intervention to Reduce Emergency Department Visits in Black Individuals with Diabetes.

Black individuals with diabetes have high rates of emergency department (ED) use. This randomized controlled trial compared the efficacy of Diabetes Interprofessional Team to Enhance Adherence to Medical Care (DM I-TEAM) versus Usual Medical Care (UMC) to reduce number of return ED visits/hospitalizations over 12 months in 200 Black individuals with diabetes after an ED visit. DM I-TEAM consisted of community health worker-delivered diabetes education and behavior activation, telehealth visits with a diabetes nurse educator and primary care physicians, and clinical pharmacist recommendations to reduce potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs). Secondary outcomes included glycemic control, PIMs use, diabetes self-management, diabetes self-efficacy, depression, and medical trust. Participants had a mean age of 64.9 years and 73.0% were women. The 2 treatment groups were similar in baseline characteristics. Sixty-eight (69.4%) DM I-TEAM participants and 69 (67.6%) UMC participants had at least 1 incident ED visit/hospitalization over 12 months. The adjusted incidence rate ratio for DM I-TEAM versus UMC was 1.11 (95% confidence interval 0.79-1.56; P = 0.54). DM I-TEAM participants attained significantly better diabetes self-management, diabetes self-efficacy, and institutional trust than UMC participants. There were no treatment group differences in hemoglobin A1c level nor PIMs use. Among Black individuals with diabetes, a novel culturally relevant intervention was no better than usual care at preventing return ED visits/hospitalizations over 1 year. Before reasonable clinical interventions such as DM I-TEAM can be effective, reducing system-level barriers to health, building community health care capacity, and designing interventions that better align with the everyday realities of patients' lives are necessary. clinicaltrials.gov NCT03393338.

A Shorter Door-In-Door-Out Time Is Associated with Improved Outcome in Large Vessel Occlusion Stroke.

Introduction: Endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) significantly improves outcomes in large vessel occlusion stroke (LVOS). When a patient with a LVOS arrives at a hospital that does not perform EVT, emergent transfer to an endovascular stroke center (ESC) is required. Our objective was to determine the association between door-in-door-out time (DIDO) and 90-day outcomes in patients undergoing EVT. Methods: We conducted an analysis of the Optimizing Prehospital Stroke Systems of Care-Reacting to Changing Paradigms (OPUS-REACH) registry of 2,400 LVOS patients treated at nine ESCs in the United States. We examined the association between DIDO times and 90-day outcomes as measured by the modified Rankin scale. Results: A total of 435 patients were included in the final analysis. The mean DIDO time for patients with good outcomes was 17 minute shorter than patients with poor outcomes (122 minutes [min] vs 139 min, P = 0.04). Absolute DIDO cutoff times of ≤60 min, ≤90 min, or ≤120 min were not associated with improved functional outcomes (46.4 vs 32.3%, P = 0.12; 38.6 vs 30.6%, P = 0.10; and 36.4 vs 28.9%, P = 0.10, respectively). This held true for patients with hyperacute strokes of less than four-hour onset. Lower baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score (11.9 vs 18.2, P = <.001) and younger age (62.5 vs 74.9 years (P < .001) were associated with improved outcomes. On multiple regression analysis, age (odds ratio [OR] 1.71, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.45-2.02) and baseline NIHSS score (OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.42-1.98) were associated with improved outcomes while DIDO time was not associated with better outcome (OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.99-1.30). Conclusion: Although the DIDO time was shorter for patients with a good outcome, this was non-significant in multiple regression analysis. Receipt of intravenous thrombolysis and time to EVT were not associated with better outcomes, while male gender, lower age, arrival by private vehicle, and lower NIHSS score portended better outcomes. No absolute DIDO-time cutoff or modifiable factor was associated with improved outcomes for LVOS. This study underscores the need to streamline DIDO times but not to set an artificial DIDO time benchmark to meet.

Delay in hospital presentation is the main reason large vessel occlusion stroke patients do not receive intravenous thrombolysi.

Objectives: Intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) and endovascular therapy (EVT) are the mainstays of treatment for large vessel occlusion stroke (LVOS). Prior studies have examined why patients have not received IVT, the most cited reasons being last-known-well (LKW) to hospital arrival of >4.5 hours and minor/resolving stroke symptoms. Given that LVOS patients typically present moderate-to-severe neurologic deficits, these patients should be easier to identify and treat than patients with minor strokes. This investigation explores why IVT was not administered to a cohort of LVOS patients who underwent EVT. Methods: This is an analysis of the Optimizing the Use of Prehospital Stroke Systems of Care (OPUS-REACH) registry, which contains patients from 9 endovascular centers who underwent EVT between 2015 and 2020. The exposure of interest was the receipt of intravenous thrombolysis. Descriptive summary statistics are presented as means and SDs for continuous variables and as frequencies with percentages for categorical variables. Two-sample t tests were used to compare continuous variables and the chi-square test was used to compare categorical variables between those who received IVT and those who did not receive EVT. Results: Two thousand forty-three patients were included and 60% did not receive IVT. The most common reason for withholding IVT was LKW to arrival of >4.5 (57.2%). The second most common contraindication was oral anticoagulation (15.5%). On multivariable analysis, 2 factors were associated with not receiving IVT: increasing age (odds ratio [OR] 0.86; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.78-0.93) and increasing time from LKW-to hospital arrival (OR 0.45 95% CI 0.46-0.49). Conclusion: Like prior studies, the most frequent reason for exclusion from IVT was a LKW to hospital presentation of >4.5 hours; the second reason was anticoagulation. Efforts must be made to increase awareness of the time-sensitive nature of IVT and evaluate the safety of IVT in patients on oral anticoagulants.

Delayed salicylate toxicity with undetectable initial levels after large-dose aspirin ingestion.

Aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid), the most commonly used medicinal salicylate, is an antiinflammatory, antipyretic, antirheumatic, and analgesic agent. In 2005, according to the Toxic Exposures Survey from the American Association of Poison Control Centers' National Poisoning and Exposure Database, there were more than 20,000 reported aspirin and nonaspirin salicylate exposures, 64% of which required treatment in a health care facility. Of these exposures, 50% were reported as intentional overdoses and 60 patients died.

Generation and reactions of Pentacyclo[4.3.0.0(2,4).0(3,8).0(5,7)]non-4-ene.

The highly pyramidalized alkene, pentacyclo[4.3.0.0(2,4).0(3,8).0(5,7)]non-4-ene (9), has been generated via treatment of 4,5-diiodopentacyclo[4.3.0.0(2,4).0(3,8).0(5,7)]nonane (12) with n-butyllithium and tert-butyllithium. The title alkene has also been trapped as its Diels-Alder adduct with 1,3-diphenylisobenzofuran, 2,5-dimethylfuran, and spiro[2.4]hepta-4,6-diene. Products resulting from alkyllithium addition to the pyramidalized double bond of 9 have been isolated and fully characterized spectroscopically. The geometry, olefin strain energy, heat of hydrogenation, and relative HOMO/LUMO energies of 9 have been obtained by ab initio calculations at the MP2 and B3LYP levels using the 6-31G* basis set.