Cervicocranial artery dissection and scuba diving: Is there a link or is it serendipity?

INTRODUCTION: Numerous reports have documented cervicocranial artery dissection (CCAD) associated with scuba diving. The question remains as to whether there are risk factors unique to scuba diving related to the occurrence of CCAD. OBJECTIVES: This article aims to perform an examination of the reported cases to demonstrate any commonality among the injured divers and association with known risk factors for CCAD. METHODS: A PubMed search was performed utilizing the key words: carotid artery dissection, dissection, arterial dissection, cranial artery dissection, scuba, diving, scuba diving. Articles including reports, reviews, trials, case series, and letters were considered. Each report was critically dissected for information specific to the dive itself and the diver and analyzed for similarities and consistency with known risks. RESULTS: Twelve (12) reports of CCAD associated with scuba diving were identified. Activities involved with scuba diving appear to be consistent with CCAD risk factors. It is unclear if hyperbaric stress and physiological changes during a dive present specific risk. Trauma - e.g., environmental protection and activities associated with diving - was identified as a common risk factor in all cases. Ten (10) cases involved arteries at anatomic sites commonly associated with dissections. Seven divers documented to have dive profiles suspicious of decompression sickness were identified. CONCLUSIONS: There appears to be a correlation with minor traumas that occur with diving and CCAD. The inconsistency of the dive-related specific information reported makes it impossible for investigation of hyperbaric stress-related risk factors for CCAD to be analyzed.

The Perfect Storm: Exam of a Medical Error and Factors Contributing to Its Possible Escalation.

OBJECTIVE: After an initial medical misadventure, failure of recognition and continuing factors that could perpetuate the error are examined. METHODS: A critical evaluation of the continuum of care after the initial error was conducted through chart review and comparison to published standards. RESULTS: Analysis of the continuum of care after the original error demonstrated numerous system failures that should have alerted the providers to the initial error. DISCUSSION: Technology, electronic medical records, lack of critical communications, and short cuts have the potential to not recognize patient care safety issues and potential harm. CONCLUSIONS: Medical errors are multifactorial. Blame casting and accusations are not productive. Critical analysis of systems/processes, current technology, eliminating shortcuts, and critical communications may increase patient safety.

The value of preoperative pharmacologic stress testing before vascular surgery using ACC/AHA guidelines: a prospective, randomized trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the validity of preoperative cardiac stress testing using clinical predictors from the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Guidelines on Perioperative Evaluation before Noncardiac Surgery in patients undergoing vascular surgery. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized pilot study. SETTING: Academic medical center. PARTICIPANTS: Patients undergoing elective abdominal aortic, infrainguinal, and carotid vascular surgery. INTERVENTIONS: After stratification by American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) Guideline parameters, 99 patients were randomized to preoperative cardiac stress testing or to no stress testing and followed for up to 12 months postoperatively for adverse cardiac outcomes. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Before hospital discharge of 46 patients who underwent preoperative stress testing, 7 (15%) had inducible ischemia with no adverse postoperative cardiac outcomes, whereas only 1 (3%) of 39 patients (85%) with no ischemia had a nonfatal adverse cardiac outcome (p = not significant). Of 53 patients without preoperative stress testing, only 2 (4%) had a nonfatal adverse postoperative cardiac outcome. There were no cardiac deaths. At 12-month follow-up in 79 (80%) patients, there was 1 nonfatal adverse cardiac outcome (no stress test) and 1 cardiac death (abnormal stress test), reflecting a 1% 12-month cardiac morbidity and mortality. CONCLUSION: In this small prospective, randomized study evaluating the validity of preoperative cardiac stress testing using ACC/AHA Guidelines before major vascular surgery, preoperative cardiac stress testing offered no incremental value for determining postoperative adverse cardiac outcomes. Larger randomized clinical trials are needed to confirm these findings.