April 16, 2015

There are approximately 8 to 10 million patients coming to Emergency Departments (EDs) in the United States annually. In the US, we use a very liberal testing strategy in order to avoid acute coronary syndrome (ACS) in patients presenting with chest pain. This results in over 50% of ED patients with acute chest pain receiving serial cardiac biomarkers, stress testing, and cardiac angiography at an estimated cost of $10 to $13 billion annually and yet fewer than 10% of these patients are diagnosed with ACS. The 2-hour accelerated diagnostic protocol (ADAPT) combines  0 and 2 hour cardiac troponin (cTn), electrocardiograms (ECGs), and an adapted Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) score to help identify ED patients safe for early discharge. Previous studies show that this strategy can identify as many as 20% of patients for early discharge with a high sensitivity of 97.9% to 99.7% for major adverse cardiac events (MACE) at 30 days. This ADP has yet to be tested in a US population until now.

April 6, 2015

Welcome to the REBEL Cast Episode 7, where Swami, Matt, and I are going to tackle a couple of articles just published this year. Today we are going to specifically tackle:
  • Topic #1: Basic Life Support (BLS) vs Advanced Cardiac Life Support (ACLS) in Out of Hospital Cardiac Arrest (OHCA)
  • Topic #2: PROMISE Trial - Anatomic vs Functional Testing for Coronary Artery Disease (CAD)

March 17, 2015

Since 2002, the surviving sepsis campaign (SSC) has stated that best practice in sepsis care includes: early recognition, source control, appropriate/timely antibiotic therapy, resuscitation with intravenous fluids (IVF) and vasoactive medications. Resuscitation of the septic patient in the emergency department has been largely based off the 2001 Rivers trial [1]. This single center study's focus was to optimize tissue oxygen delivery following several parameters including, central venous pressure (CVP), mean arterial pressure (MAP), and central venous oxygen saturation (SCVO2) to guide IVF, vasoactive medications, and packed red blood cell (PRBC) transfusions. Well today, part 3 of the sepsis trilogy was published in the saga of Early Goal Directed Therapy (EGDT) versus "usual" care. The 3 parts to this saga consist of:
  1. Protocolized Care for Early Septic Shock (ProCESS) [2] - 31 Emergency Departments in the United States
  2. Australasian Resuscitation in Sepsis Evaluation (ARISE) [3] - 51 Emergency Departments in Australia, New Zealand, Finland, Hong Kong, and Ireland
  3. The Protocolised Management in Sepsis (ProMISe) Trial [4] - 56 Emergency Departments in the United Kingdom

March 16, 2015

There are more than 750,000 cases of severe sepsis and septic shock in the US each year.  Most patients who present with sepsis receive their initial care in the emergency department.  In 2001, there was a landmark study by Rivers et al [1] that reported that among patients with severe sepsis or septic shock mortality was significantly lower among those who received a 6 hour protocol of Early Goal-Directed Therapy (EGDT) (i.e. 30.5% vs 46.5%). The premise of EGDT was that "usual care" lacked aggressive, timely assessment and treatment. The EGDT protocol used central venous catheterization (CVC) to monitor central venous pressure (CVP) and central venous oxygen saturation (SCVO2) to guide the use of intravenous fluids (IVFs), vasopressors, packed red blood cell (PRBC) transfusions, and dobutamine in order to achieve pre-specified physiological targets.  Since the publication of this landmark article, physicians have become more aggressive in the management of sepsis which raises the question of whether all elements of the protocol are still necessary. 

March 15, 2015

Recently, I wrote a post on the use of epinephrine in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) and this triggered some interesting discussion on twitter. Are we at a point that we can just stop using epinephrine in OHCA?  Has anyone stopped actually using epinephrine in OHCA and if so, why or why not? The evidence seems to point to no "good" neurologic benefit over basic life support (BLS).  I would love to hear more peoples thoughts on this.
0