A role of point-of-care ultrasound in the emergency department diagnosis of vision loss due to traumatic cataract.

BACKGROUND: Ocular complaints, including acute or subacute vision loss, are commonly encountered in emergency departments (ED). These potentially time-sensitive complaints are difficult to diagnose and evaluate without adequate, specialized equipment and expertise. Additionally, a thorough evaluation often requires a more extensive and specialized physical exam, imaging, and ophthalmologic consultation, all of which may not be readily available in the acute setting. CASE PRESENTATION: This case report presented a patient in the emergency department with the chief complaint of vision loss. Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) using the 10-MHz-linear-array probe, in the ocular setting, demonstrated calcification of the lens, a finding consistent with cataract in the right eye. CONCLUSIONS: The use of POCUS can expedite the accurate identification of vision threatening pathology, such as cataracts, and streamline ED disposition and plan of care.

Variation in Trauma Team Response Fees in United States Trauma Centers: An Additional Undisclosed Variable Cost in Trauma Care.

BACKGROUND: The rising costs associated with trauma care in the United States is an important topic in today's healthcare environment. Factors such as innovations in technology, increasing governmental and organizational regulations, and the specialization of care have led to increasing costs to the patient. A component of trauma cost is the one-time trauma team response fee (TTRF). The determination process of the TTRF's dollar amount is elusive as no apparent standardized process exists and the literature is scant regarding this aspect of trauma care. METHODS: A nationwide cross-sectional convenience sample was conducted using SurveyMonkey. Surveys were sent to 525 trauma centers in the continental United States, including Alaska and Hawaii, between October 8, 2019 and March 11, 2020. Additionally, hospital medical directors and trauma medical directors were queried on their knowledge of their facility's TTRF amount. RESULTS: Only 46 out of 525 trauma centers, or 8.8% of those surveyed shared their scheduled fees. Comparisons of TTRFs among different trauma centers, activation levels, and geographical locations were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding the true costs of trauma care and fees for patients in the United States remains elusive due to inadequate data and low response rates. Trauma centers struggle to maintain financial viability as regulatory agencies and the public push for transparency of TTRFs. Collaboration between trauma centers and regulatory agencies is needed to ensure a balance between providing quality trauma care with justified associated charges and financial sustainability.

Inferior Long-Term Graft Survival of Suboptimal Kidneys After Living Donor Kidney Transplantation.

BACKGROUND: In living donors, if both kidneys are considered to be of equal quality, the side with favorable anatomy for transplant is usually selected. A "suboptimal kidney" is a kidney that has a significant abnormality and is chosen to maintain the principle of leaving the better kidney with the donor. We hypothesized that the long-term outcome of suboptimal kidney is inferior to that of the normal kidney. METHODS: In a retrospective analysis of 1744 living donor kidney transplantations performed between 1999 and 2015 at our institution, 172 allografts were considered as a suboptimal kidney (9.9%). Median length of follow-up after living donor kidney transplantation was 59.5 months (interquartile range 26.3-100.8). This study strictly complied with the Helsinki Congress and the Istanbul Declaration regarding donor source. RESULTS: The reasons for suboptimal kidneys were cysts or tumors (46.5%), arterial abnormalities (22.7%), inferior size or function (19.8%), and anatomic abnormalities (11.0%). Suboptimal kidneys showed worse long-term overall graft survival regardless of the reasons (5-year: control vs suboptimal kidney; 88.9% vs 79.3%, P = .001 and 10-year: 73.6% vs 63.5%, P = .004). Suboptimal kidneys showed a 1.6-fold higher adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) of all-cause graft loss (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.1-2.5, P = .025) and had the same impact as older donor age (≥ 54 years old, aHR: 1.6, 95% CI: 1.1-2.4, P = .008). CONCLUSIONS: The impact of suboptimal kidney should be factored into the donor selection process.

Inferior long-term graft survival after end-to-side reconstruction for two renal arteries in living donor renal transplantation.

Living donor kidneys with two arteries can be revascularized using various techniques depending on anatomy. We hypothesized that the revascularization technique could impact long-term outcomes. We retrospectively analyzed 1714 living donor renal transplants at our institution between 1999 and 2015. Three hundred and eleven kidneys had dual arteries, and these were categorized into 5 groups; end-to-side (n = 18), inferior epigastric artery (n = 21), direct anastomosis (n = 65), side-to-side (n = 126) and ligated (n = 81). We then compared the outcomes with that of a control group (single artery, n = 1403) using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses. Cox regression was adjusted by age, sex and race/ethnicity of donor and recipient, side of kidney, transplant period and recipient surgeon. Compared to the control group, the end-to-side group had increased all-cause graft loss (10 years: 77.2% vs 24.5%, adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 3.02, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.30-7.03, p = 0.010) and death-censored graft loss (10 years: 82.0% vs 55.9%, aHR 4.17, 95% CI 1.63-10.68, p = 0.003), whereas the other groups did not. Our study shows that 10-year overall survival and death-censored graft survival were significantly worse for end-to-side arterial reconstruction than for other techniques. Alternative techniques to the end-to-side method should be used for accessory arteries that require revascularization.

Comparison of qSOFA with current emergency department tools for screening of patients with sepsis for critical illness.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to compare the quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) to systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS), severe sepsis criteria and lactate levels for their ability to identify ED patients with sepsis with critical illness. METHODS: We conducted this multicenter retrospective cohort study at five US hospitals, enrolling all adult patients admitted to these hospitals from their EDs with infectious disease-related illnesses from 1 January 2016 to 30 April 2016. We abstracted clinical variables for SIRS, severe sepsis and qSOFA scores, using values in the first 6 hours of ED stay. Our primary outcome was critical illness, defined as one or more of the composite outcomes of death, vasopressor use or intensive care unit (ICU) admission within 72 hours of presentation. We determined diagnostic test characteristics for qSOFA scores, SIRS, severe sepsis criteria and lactate level thresholds. MAIN RESULTS: Of 3743 enrolled patients, 512 (13.7%) had the primary composite outcome. The qSOFA scores were ≥1, >2 and 3 in 1839 (49.1%), 626 (16.7%) and 146 (3.9%) patients, respectively; 2202 (58.8%) met SIRS criteria and 1085 (29.0%) met severe sepsis criteria. qSOFA ≥1 and SIRS had similarly high sensitivity [86.1% (95% CI 82.8% to 89.0%) vs 86.7% (95% CI 83.5% to 89.5%)], but qSOFA ≥1 had higher specificity [56.7% (95% CI 55.0% to 58.5%) vs 45.6% (43.9% to 47.3%); mean difference 11.1% (95% CI 8.7% to 13.6%)]. qSOFA ≥2 had higher specificity than severe sepsis criteria [89.1% (88.0% to 90.2%) vs 77.5% (76.0% to 78.9%); mean difference 11.6% (9.8% to 13.4%)]. qSOFA ≥1 had greater sensitivity than a lactate level ≥2 (mean difference 24.6% (19.2% to 29.9%)). CONCLUSION: For patients admitted from the ED with infectious disease diagnoses, qSOFA criteria performed as well or better than SIRS criteria, severe sepsis criteria and lactate levels in predicting critical illness.