Evaluation of the role of repeated inferior vena cava sonography in estimating first 24 h fluid requirement in resuscitation of major blunt trauma patients in emergency department Suez Canal University Hospital.

INTRODUCTION: The assessment of hemodynamic status in polytrauma patients is an important principle of the primary survey of trauma patients, and screening for ongoing hemorrhage and assessing the efficacy of resuscitation is vital in avoiding preventable death and significant morbidity in these patients. Invasive procedures may lead to various complications and the IVC ultrasound measurements are increasingly recognized as a potential noninvasive replacement or a source of adjunct information. AIMOF THIS STUDY: The study aimed to determine if repeated ultrasound assessment of the inferior vena cava (diameter, collapsibility (IVC- CI) in major trauma patients presenting with collapsible IVC before resuscitation and after the first hour of resuscitation will predict total intravenous fluid requirements at first 24 h. PATIENTS & METHODS: The current study was conducted on 120 patients presented to the emergency department with Major blunt trauma (having significant injury to two or more ISS body regions or an ISS greater than 15). The patients(cases) group (shocked group) (60) patients with signs of shock such as decreased blood pressure < 90/60 mmHg or a more than 30% decrease from the baseline systolic pressure, heart rate > 100 b/m, cold, clammy skin, capillary refill > 2 s and their shock index above0.9. The control group (non-shocked group) (60) patients with normal blood pressure and heart rate, no other signs of shock (normal capillary refill, warm skin), and (shock index ≤ 0.9). Patients were evaluated at time 0 (baseline), 1 h after resucitation, and 24 h after 1st hour for:(blood pressure, pulse, RR, SO2, capillary refill time, MABP, IVCci, IVCmax, IVCmin). RESULTS: Among 120 Major blunt trauma patients, 98 males (81.7%) and 22 females (18.3%) were included in this analysis; hypovolemic shocked patients (60 patients) were divided into two main groups according to IVC diameter after the first hour of resuscitation; IVC repleted were 32 patients (53.3%) while 28 patients (46.7%) were IVC non-repleted. In our study population, there were statistically significant differences between repleted and non-repleted IVC cases regarding IVCD, DIVC min, IVCCI (on arrival) (after 1 h) (after 24 h of 1st hour of resuscitation) ( p-value < 0.05) and DIVC Max (on arrival) (after 1 h) (p-value < 0.001). There is no statistically significant difference (p-value = 0.075) between repleted and non-repleted cases regarding DIVC Max (after 24 h).In our study, we found that IVCci0 at a cut-off point > 38.5 has a sensitivity of 80.0% and Specificity of 85.71% with AUC 0.971 and a good 95% CI (0.938 - 1.0), which means that IVCci of 38.6% or more can indicate fluid responsiveness. We also found that IVCci 1 h (after fluid resuscitation) at cut-off point > 28.6 has a sensitivity of 80.0% and Specificity of 75% with AUC 0.886 and good 95% CI (0.803 - 0.968), which means that IVCci of 28.5% or less can indicate fluid unresponsiveness after 1st hour of resuscitation. We found no statistically significant difference between repleted and non-repleted cases regarding fluid requirement and amount of blood transfusion at 1st hour of resuscitation (p-value = 0.104). CONCLUSION: Repeated bedside ultrasonography of IVCD, and IVCci before and after the first hour of resuscitation could be an excellent reliable invasive tool that can be used in estimating the First 24 h of fluid requirement in Major blunt trauma patients and assessment of fluid status.

Comparing the diagnostic accuracy of modified RIPASA and MASS in patients diagnosed with acute appendicitis in Suez Canal University Hospital Emergency Department: a cross-sectional study.

INTRODUCTION: Acute appendicitis is the most common surgical condition presented in emergency departments globally. It is also the most common cause of abdominal pain treated surgically, with a lifetime risk of 7%. Recent studies show MASS to be easy, simple and cheap diagnostic tool for supporting the diagnosis of acute appendicitis.The modified RIPASA scoring system includes more parameters than MASS and the latter did not contain certain parameters. These parameters are shown to add to the accuracy of modified RIPASA over MASS especially in Asian population. AIM OF THIS STUDY: The aim of the study was to improve the diagnosis of acute appendicitis in order to lower the negative appendectomy rates. PATIENTS & METHODS: This is cross sectional study, the study included 40 patients presented to the emergency department at Suez Canal University hospital with abdominal pain and suspected clinically as acute appendicitis. Then the decision of surgical intervention was made by surgeons, who were blinded for our study, based on their clinical judgment. Then both scores were calculated for all patients and other clinical data were obtained from patients after accepting being included in our study with an informed consent.After operations, the operating theatre records were obtained and cases pathological investigation of the appendices was done. Then the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values were calculated and so the diagnostic accuracy for both scoring systems. RESULTS: Clinically, all the patients were suffering acute right iliac fossa tenderness (100%), rebound tenderness (90%), and nausea/ vomiting (70%). Only 45% had elevated White blood count and 55% had negative urine analysis. Histopathological analysis of appendices of the studied patients showed that 40% of the patients had suppurative appendicitis, one quarter of them had catarrhal appendicitis and only 20% had complicated perforated appendicitis. Meanwhile, about 15% had normal (negative) appendix. Modified RIPASA showed a good discriminative ability in our study where the area under the curve for modified RIPASA was 0.902 (95% CI: 0.798 - 1.00) (p = 0.002). Moreover, a value of 8.5 or higher was found to be the best cut-off point to predict acute appendicitis among patient suspected clinically as acute appendicitis with sensitivity = 70.6%, specificity = 100%, positive predictive value of 100%, and negative predictive value of 37.5% and 75% accuracy.The best cut-off score to diagnose acute appendicitis in our sample based on MASS was fixed at 5.5, where the sensitivity of the MASS reached 47.1%, with specificity of 33.3%, positive predictive value of 80%, negative predictive value of 10% and accuracy 45%. CONCLUSION: The modified RIPASA score is the best diagnostic scoring system for acute appendicitis if compared to the modified Alvarado score, with the former achieving significantly higher sensitivity and diagnostic accuracy. Modified RIPASA was concluded to be a more applicable and useful score. Negative appendicectomy rates can also be avoided by using modified RIPASA score.

Assessment of Canadian Syncope Risk Score in the prediction of outcomes of patients with syncope at the Emergency Department of Suez Canal University: STROBE compliant.

ABSTRACT: Syncope is a temporary loss of consciousness usually related to insufficient blood flow to the brain. It's also called fainting or "passing out." Syncope is responsible for 3% to 5% of emergency department visits, with a hospitalization rate in about 40% of cases, with an average stay of 5.5 days. The Canadian Syncope Risk Score showed good discrimination and calibration for 30-day risk of serious adverse events after disposition from the emergency department.The aim was to assess Canadian Syncope Risk Score in predicting outcomes and mortality at the emergency department of Suez Canal University Hospitals.A prospective observational cohort study was carried out in emergency department in Suez Canal University Hospital. After approval by the Ethical and Research Committee of Faculty of Medicine, Suez Canal University, 60 patients with syncope attending to emergency department were included to this study. All included participants were assessed by history taking and they also assessed by the Canadian Syncope Risk Score.The Canadian Syncope Risk Score's mean of the study group was 4.9 and the range of the scores was from -2 to 11. The mean of the percentage of risk of serious events at 30 days in the study group was 29.17% and it ranged from 0.7% to 83.6%.There was a statistically significant difference between means Canadian Syncope Risk Score's score regarding complication occurrence. Cases which showed complications had a mean score of 7.33 compared to a mean score of 1.25 in case of no complication occurrence P-value <.001. At a cut-off point of more than 3 for the Canadian Syncope Risk Score's, sensitivity of that score in complication's occurrence prediction was 100% and the specificity was 87.5% P-value <.001.The Canadian Syncope Risk Score's is strong predictor for risk of serious adverse events and a good indicator for admission, with 100% sensitivity and 87.5% specificity at cut off point more than 3.