Occurrence of Severe Arrhythmias in Patients with Non-ST Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome (NSTE-ACS): A Retrospective Study.

BACKGROUND: Non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) is one of the most frequent manifestations of coronary artery disease. The occurrence of serious heart rhythm disorders (SHRDs) in NSTE-ACS is not well documented. However, continuous heart rhythm monitoring is recommended during the initial management of NSTE-ACS. The targeted monitoring of patients at greater risk for SHRDs could facilitate patients' care in emergency departments (EDs) where the flow of patients is continuously increasing. METHODS: This retrospective single-center study included 480 patients from emergency and cardiology departments within the Strasbourg University Hospital between 1 January 2019 and 31 December 2020. The objective was to estimate the frequency of the occurrence of SHRDs among patients with NSTE-ACS. The secondary objective was to highlight the factors associated with a higher risk of SHRDs. RESULTS: The proportion of SHRDs during the first 48 h of hospital care was 2.3% (CI95%: 1.2-4.1%, n = 11). Two time periods were considered: before coronary angiography (1.0%), and during, or after coronary angiography (1.3%). In the first group, two patients required immediate treatment (0.4% of the patients) and no death occurred. In the univariate analysis, the variables significantly associated with SHRDs were age, anticoagulant medication, a decrease in glomerular filtration rate, plasmatic hemoglobin, and left ventricle ejection fraction (LVEF), and an increase in plasmatic troponin, BNP, and CRP levels. In the multivariable analysis, plasmatic hemoglobin > 12 g/dL seemed to be a protective factor for SHRDs. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, SHRDs were rare and, most often, spontaneously resolved. These data challenge the relevance of systematic rhythm monitoring during the initial management of patients with NSTE-ACS.

Imaging strategies used in emergency departments for the diagnostic workup of COVID-19 patients during the first wave of the pandemic: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Emergency departments (EDs) were on the front line for the diagnostic workup of patients with COVID-19-like symptoms during the first wave. Chest imaging was the key to rapidly identifying COVID-19 before administering RT-PCR, which was time-consuming. The objective of our study was to compare the costs and organizational benefits of triage strategies in ED during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study in five EDs in France, involving 3712 consecutive patients consulting with COVID-like symptoms between 9 March 2020 and 8 April 2020, to assess the cost effectiveness of imaging strategies (chest radiography, chest computed tomography (CT) scan in the presence of respiratory symptoms, systematic ultra-low-dose (ULD) chest CT, and no systematic imaging) on ED length of stay (LOS) in the ED and on hospital costs. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was calculated as the difference in costs divided by the difference in LOS. RESULTS: Compared with chest radiography, workup with systematic ULD chest CT was the more cost-effective strategy (average LOS of 6.89 hours; average cost of €3646), allowing for an almost 4-hour decrease in LOS in the ED at a cost increase of €98 per patient. Chest radiography (extendedly dominated) and RT-PCR with no systematic imaging were the least effective strategies, with an average LOS of 10.8 hours. The strategy of chest CT in the presence of respiratory symptoms was more effective than the systematic ULD chest CT strategy, with the former providing a gain of 37 minutes at an extra cost of €718. DISCUSSION: Systematic ULD chest CT for patients with COVID-like symptoms in the ED is a cost-effective strategy and should be considered to improve the management of patients in the ED during the pandemic, given the need to triage patients.

Patients with Initial Negative RT-PCR and Typical Imaging of COVID-19: Clinical Implications.

The sensitivity of reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) has been questioned due to negative results in some patients who were strongly suspected of having coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The aim of our study was to analyze the prognosis of infected patients with initial negative RT-PCR in the emergency department (ED) during the COVID-19 outbreak. This study included two cohorts of adult inpatients admitted into the ED. All patients who were suspected to be infected with SARS-CoV-2 and who underwent a typical chest CT imaging were included. Thus, we studied two distinct cohorts: patients with positive RT-PCR (PCR+) and those with negative initial RT-PCR (PCR-). The data were analyzed using Bayesian methods. We included 66 patients in the PCR- group and 198 in the PCR+ group. The baseline characteristics did not differ except in terms of a proportion of lower chronic respiratory disease in the PCR- group. We noted a less severe clinical presentation in the PCR- group (lower respiratory rate, lower oxygen need and mechanical ventilation requirement). Hospital mortality (9.1% vs. 9.6%) did not differ between the two groups. Despite an initially less serious clinical presentation, the mortality of patients infected by SARS-CoV-2 with a negative RT-PCR did not differ from those with positive RT-PCR.

Comparison between atosiban and nicardipine in inducing hypotension during in-utero transfers for threatening premature delivery.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare the frequency of hypotension induced by oxytocin antagonist atosiban and nicardipine. METHODS: This case-control study enrolled 14 pregnant women presenting with threatening premature delivery treated with atosiban and managed by a physician-staffed Emergency Medical Service Department (French Emergency Medical Service system) during inter-hospital transfers. A control group of 42 consecutive pregnant women presenting with threatening premature delivery managed during inter-hospital transfers during the same period and treated with nicardipine was set up. The control group was recruited after matching on confounding variables: age 38 years or less and no previous cardiovascular disease to avoid factors related to the occurrence of cardiovascular events, duration of out-of-hospital management of at least 60 min to have similar likelihood of side-effect occurrence, and parity 2 or less and gestational age from 25 to 32 weeks to make comparable groups from the obstetrical viewpoint. Frequency of hypotension was compared between the two groups. RESULTS: Hypotension was observed in two patients (8%) in the atosiban-group and in five patients (14%) in the nicardipine-group, which is not significantly different (P>0.99). CONCLUSION: Despite the notion that oxytocin antagonist atosiban has limited or no systemic adverse effects, these results suggest that this cost-consuming drug does not avoid hypotension and cannot help to reduce the level of monitoring.