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.

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.

Nebulized Terbutaline and Ipratropium Bromide Versus Terbutaline Alone in Acute Exacerbation of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Requiring Noninvasive Ventilation: A Randomized Double-blind Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Short-acting ß2 -agonists are the mainstay of treatment of patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) in the emergency department (ED). It is still unclear whether the addition of short-acting anticholinergics is clinically more effective care compared to treatment with ß2 -agonists alone in patients with hypercapnic AECOPD. OBJECTIVE: The objective was to evaluate whether combining ipratropium bromide (IB) to terbutaline reduces hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) admission rates compared to terbutaline alone in AECOPD hypercapnic patients. METHODS: In this double-blind controlled trial, patients who were admitted to the ED for AECOPD requiring noninvasive ventilation (NIV) were randomized to receive either 5 mg of nebulized terbutaline combined to 0.5 mg of IB (terbutaline/IB group, n = 115) or 5 mg of terbutaline sulfate (terbutaline group, n = 117). Nebulization was repeated every 20 minutes for the first hour and every 4 hours within the first day. Primary outcomes were the rate of hospital admission and need for endotracheal intubation within the first 24 hours of the start of the experimental treatment. Secondary outcomes included changes from baseline of dyspnea, physiologic variables, length of hospital stay, ICU admission rate, and 7-day mortality. RESULTS: The two groups were similar regarding baseline demographic and clinical characteristics. Hospital admission was observed in 70 patients (59.8%) in the terbutaline/IB group and in 75 patients (65.2%) in the terbutaline group (respiratory rate [RR] = 1.09, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.93 to 1.27, p = 0.39). ICU admission was required in 37 (32.2%) patients in the terbutaline/IB group and 30 patients (25.6%) in terbutaline group (RR = 1.25, 95% CI = 1.02 to 1.54, p = 0.27). There were no significant differences in dyspnea score, blood gas parameters changes, vital signs improvement, and 7-day death rate between both groups. CONCLUSION: In patients admitted to the ED for AECOPD requiring NIV, combination of nebulized IB and terbutaline did not reduce hospital admission and need to ICU care.

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.

Case of Massive Hydatid Pulmonary Embolism Incidentally Discovered in a 56-Year-Old Woman with Posttraumatic Abdominal Pain.

Hydatid pulmonary embolism rarely occurs. It arises from the rupture of a hydatid heart cyst or the opening of a visceral hydatid cyst into the venous circulation. We report a case with pulmonary hydatidosis resulting in a massive bilateral pulmonary embolism in a 56-year-old woman with history of hepatic echinococcosis. A brief overview of clinical features and radiologic findings is presented.

Missed injuries in pre-hospital trauma patients.

BACKGROUND: During primary survey of trauma patients, missed injuries and delayed diagnosis can be a potential source of morbidity and mortality. OBJECTIVE: To assess type and frequency of missed injuries in prehospital care in trauma patients and to analyze their contributing factors and implications. METHODS:   It is a descriptive and analytic prospective study. It was performed over six months which had included 200 trauma patients. The initial assessment made by the out-of hospital team of Sousse was compared to the second survey made in the emergency room and intensive care unit after the radiological assessment. RESULTS: Sixty seven (67) missed injuries were discovered in 51 patients, so 25.5% missed injuries incidence. These injuries were avoidable in 35.82% of cases. Twenty (20) injuries (29.85%) had clinically significant outcomes. Injuries are missed in the abdomen in 62.5% of cases, in the pelvis in 61.11% of cases, in the chest in 41.66% of cases, in the spine in 38.06 % of cases and in 20% of cases in the limbs. Multiple contributing factors were assigned, the most important were: the hemodynamic instability (Systolic blood pressure less than 90 mmHg), the tachycardia and the low RTS. Altered level of consciousness (GCS of twelve or lower), multiple and violence of the trauma were observed but not retained as predictive factors of missing injuries. CONCLUSION:   Our study showed higher rates of severe missed injuries mainly in abdomen and pelvis. Circulatory instability and low RTS were assigned as significant factors predicting of this obviousness. Various solutions are proposed to prevent missed during the first assessment in prehospital care.

Non-invasive pressure support ventilation and CPAP in cardiogenic pulmonary edema: a multicenter randomized study in the emergency department.

INTRODUCTION: Noninvasive pressure support ventilation (NIPSV) and continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) are both advocated in the treatment of cardiogenic pulmonary edema (CPE); however, the superiority of one technique over the other has not been clearly demonstrated. With regard to its physiological effects, we hypothesized that NIPSV would be better than CPAP in terms of clinical benefit. METHODS: In a prospective, randomized, controlled study performed in four emergency departments, 200 patients were assigned to CPAP (n = 101) or NIPSV (n = 99). Primary outcome was combined events of hospital death and tracheal intubation. Secondary outcomes included resolution time, myocardial infarction rate, and length of hospital stay. Separate analysis was performed in patients with hypercapnia and those with high B-type natriuretic peptide (>500 pg/ml). RESULTS: Hospital death occurred in 5 (5.0%) patients receiving NIPSV and 3 (2.9%) patients receiving CPAP (p = 0.56). The need for intubation was observed in 6 (6%) patients in the NIPSV group and 4 (3.9%) patients in the CPAP group (p = 0.46). Combined events were similar in both groups. NIPSV was associated to a shorter resolution time compared to CPAP (159 ± 54 vs. 210 ± 73 min; p < 0.01), whereas the incidence of new myocardial infarction was not different between both groups. Similar results were found in hypercapnic patients and those with high B-type natriuretic peptide. CONCLUSIONS: During CPE, NIPSV accelerates the improvement of respiratory failure compared to CPAP but does not affect primary clinical outcome either in overall population or in subgroups of patients with hypercapnia or those with high B-type natriuretic peptide.

Clonidine administered as adjuvant for bupivacaine in ilioinguinal-iliohypogastric nerve block does not prolong postoperative analgesia.

BACKGROUND: Coadministration of clonidine with local anesthetics is associated with improvement of the quality of peripheral nerve block and significant prolongation of postoperative analgesia. Better analgesia has been reported with clonidine in ilioinguinal nerve block compared with caudal use. The object of this study was to determine whether adding of 1 microg.kg(-1) clonidine to bupivacaine 0.25% in ilioinguinal-iliohypogastric nerve block prolongs postoperative analgesia in children. METHODS: Ninety-eight children ASA I-II aged between 1 and 12 years, scheduled for elective outpatient herniorrhaphy or orchidopexy were randomly allocated to receive an ilioinguinal-iliohypogastric nerve block either with 0.3 ml.kg(-1) bupivacaine 0.25% plus 1 microg.kg(-1) clonidine or only bupivacaine. Postoperative analgesic needs, time to the first analgesic supplementation and sedation score were assessed in hospital for 6 h postoperatively and at home by telephone call. RESULTS: Demographic data were similar in both groups. There was no statistical difference in the rate of rescue analgesia between the two groups during the first six postoperative hours (20.4% group clonidine vs 30.6% group no clonidine) (P = 0.17). A slight decrease in systolic blood pressure during surgery was reported in the clonidine group. There was no difference in the scores of sedation between the two groups. At home, 10 patients in the clonidine group and nine patients in the nonclonidine group received analgesic medication. There was no difference between the two groups regarding the number of patients receiving analgesic rescue during the first 24 h (log rank = 0.39). Parental satisfaction was high in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our study failed to demonstrate any advantage in addition of 1 microg.kg(-1) clonidine to 0.25% bupivacaine for ilioinguinal-iliohypogastric nerve block compared with bupivacaine 0.25% alone.