S2k guideline diagnosis and treatment of carbon monoxide poisoning.

Carbon monoxide (CO) can occur in numerous situations and ambient conditions, such as fire smoke, indoor fireplaces, silos containing large quantities of wood pellets, engine exhaust fumes, and when using hookahs. Symptoms of CO poisoning are nonspecific and can range from dizziness, headache, and angina pectoris to unconsciousness and death. This guideline presents the current state of knowledge and national recommendations on the diagnosis and treatment of patients with CO poisoning. The diagnosis of CO poisoning is based on clinical symptoms and proven or probable exposure to CO. Negative carboxyhemoglobin (COHb) levels should not rule out CO poisoning if the history and symptoms are consistent with this phenomenon. Reduced oxygen-carrying capacity, impairment of the cellular respiratory chain, and immunomodulatory processes may result in myocardial and central nervous tissue damage even after a reduction in COHb. If CO poisoning is suspected, 100% oxygen breathing should be immediately initiated in the prehospital setting. Clinical symptoms do not correlate with COHb elimination from the blood; therefore, COHb monitoring alone is unsuitable for treatment management. Especially in the absence of improvement despite treatment, a reevaluation for other possible differential diagnoses ought to be performed. Evidence regarding the benefit of hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) is scant and the subject of controversy due to the heterogeneity of studies. If required, HBOT should be initiated within 6 h. All patients with CO poisoning should be informed about the risk of delayed neurological sequelae (DNS).

[Inhalation of Flue Gases - Carbon Monoxide Intoxication]. / Vergiftung durch Rauchgase ­ Kohlenmonoxidintoxikation.

Most intoxications caused by inhalation are due to carbon monoxide (CO). Usually the reasons are fires in buildings from which people cannot escape quickly enough, open fire places or carbon monoxide emissions from combustion plants. In Germany, there are more than 4000 intoxications and over 600 fatalities resulting from CO poisining every year. Although there is a general awareness of the risks associated with CO, the specific risks and especially methods of protection are not sufficiently known.

Videolaryngoscopy for Physician-Based, Prehospital Emergency Intubation: A Prospective, Randomized, Multicenter Comparison of Different Blade Types Using A.P. Advance, C-MAC System, and KingVision.

BACKGROUND: Videolaryngoscopy is a valuable technique for endotracheal intubation. When used in the perioperative period, different videolaryngoscopes vary both in terms of technical use and intubation success rates. However, in the prehospital environment, the relative performance of different videolaryngoscopic systems is less well studied. METHODS: We conducted this prospective, randomized, multicenter study at 4 German prehospital emergency medicine centers. One hundred sixty-eight adult patients requiring prehospital emergency intubation were treated by an emergency physician and randomized to 1 of 3 portable videolaryngoscopes (A.P. Advance, C-MAC PM, and channeled blade KingVision) with different blade types. The primary outcome variable was overall intubation success and secondary outcomes included first-attempt intubation success, glottis visualization, and difficulty with handling the devices. P values for pairwise comparisons are corrected by the Bonferroni method for 3 tests (P[BF]). All presented P values are adjusted for center. RESULTS: Glottis visualization was comparable with all 3 devices. Overall intubation success for A.P. Advance, C-MAC, and KingVision was 96%, 97%, and 61%, respectively (overall: P < .001, A.P. Advance versus C-MAC: odds ratio [OR], 0.97, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.13-7.42, P[BF] > 0.99; A.P. Advance versus KingVision: OR, 0.043, 95% CI, 0.0088-0.21, P[BF] < 0.001; C-MAC versus KingVision: OR, 0.043, 95% CI, 0.0088-0.21, P[BF] < 0.001). Intubation success on the first attempt with A.P. Advance, C-MAC, and KingVision was 86%, 85%, and 48%, respectively (overall: P < .001, A.P. Advance versus C-MAC: OR, 0.89, 95% CI, 0.31-2.53, P[BF] > 0.99; A.P. Advance versus KingVision: OR, 0.24, 95% CI, 0.055-0.38, P[BF] = 0.0054; C-MAC versus KingVision: OR, 0.21, 95% CI, 0.043-.34, P[BF] < 0.003). Direct laryngoscopy for successful intubation with the videolaryngoscopic device was necessary with the A.P. Advance in 5 patients, and with the C-MAC in 4 patients. In the KingVision group, 21 patients were intubated with an alternative device. CONCLUSIONS: During prehospital emergency endotracheal intubation performed by emergency physicians, success rates of 3 commercially available videolaryngoscopes A.P. Advance, C-MAC PM, and KingVision varied markedly. We also found that although any of the videolaryngoscopes provided an adequate view, actual intubation was more difficult with the channeled blade KingVision.

[Emergency care for patients in palliative situations--algorithm for decision-making and recommendations for treatment]. / Notarzteinsätze bei palliativpatienten--algorithmus zur entscheidungsfindung und behandlungsempfehlungen.

Emergency care for patients in palliative situations is not a rare event, but often difficult to handle, because training in palliative care for emergency physicians is often insufficient. This article proposes an algorithm that should facilitate the decision-making process in such emergencies. In addition, recommendations concerning the management of symptoms in the emergency medical services are presented.

The C-MAC videolaryngoscope for prehospital emergency intubation: a prospective, multicentre, observational study.

BACKGROUND: In this preliminary prospective observational study at four physician-led air rescue centres, the efficacy of the C-MAC (Karl Storz, Tuttlingen, Germany), a new portable videolaryngoscope, was evaluated during prehospital emergency endotracheal intubations. METHODS: 80 consecutive patients requiring prehospital emergency intubation, treated by a physician introduced in the use of the C-MAC were enrolled in this study. RESULTS: Indication for prehospital intubation was trauma in 45 cases (including maxillo-facial trauma in 10 cases), cardiopulmonary resuscitation in 14 cases, and unconsciousness of neurological aetiology and cardiogenic dyspnoea in 21 cases. Forty-nine patients were intubated with a C-MAC blade size 3, and 31 with a C-MAC blade size 4. Median time to successful intubation was 20 (min-max: 5-300) seconds; 63 patients were intubated on the first attempt, 13 on the second and four after more than two attempts. A Cormack-Lehane class 1 view of the glottis was seen in 46 patients, class 2a view in 21, class 2b in eight, class 3 in three and class 4 in two. Six patients could not be intubated with the videolaryngoscopic view, but were successfully intubated at the same attempt using the C-MAC with the direct laryngoscopic view. CONCLUSION: The C-MAC videolaryngoscope was suitable for prehospital emergency endotracheal intubations with complicated airway conditions, such as maxillo-facial trauma. The option to perform direct laryngoscopy and videolaryngoscopy with the same device appears to be exceptionally important in the prehospital setting.