is the blogs audio version. The podcast typically starts by setting a clinical stage with a pertinent clinical question, followed by a discussion of the paper with pertinent results, strengths, limitations, and further discussion. Finally, we end every podcast with clinical take home points from the papers being reviewed. If there are papers you think we should evaluate, email them to

May 31, 2020

I am fortunate to work in a hospital system that is very forward thinking.  We have a phenomenal relationship with our intensivists, and I have been fortunate enough to have several discussions with them about how we are managing COVID-19 in our ICUs.  For full transparency, I don’t work up in the ICU, but had the opportunity to discuss what we are doing in our ICUs with one of our intensivists (ECMO, steroids, Remdesivir, etc...).  We are doing something different in San Antonio that I thought was worth discussing on this podcast that may be a feasible option for some institutions and some patients, but not all. If there is one thing this disease has taught me, that is one size does not fit all.

May 27, 2020

Take Home Points
  • Small to Moderate Size Pneumothorax - consider managing conservatively with observation (need to make sure consulting services on same page)
  • Needle aspiration for spontaneous pneumothorax recommend by British Thoracic and European Respiratory Societies
  • 1 in 5 patients requiring a chest tube will suffer complications - many are iatrogenic in nature. Practice procedure via simulation 
  • Chest tubes placed for traumatic pneumothoraces should get prophylactic antibiotics
  • When deciding on treatment strategy, discuss with your consultants and make sure you have institutional buy-in.

May 21, 2020

Background: Upper endoscopy allows for the identification of the source of bleeding as well as hemostatic treatment for actively bleeding lesions In patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB).  Definitive treatment with endoscopic hemostatic treatment can potentially stop bleeding in high-risk lesions and reduce further bleeding and the need for surgery. The optimal time for endoscopy to be performed is unknown.  The definition of urgent varies depending on which study you read, ranging from 2 hours up to 12 hours. Additionally, most previous studies only enrolled patients who were not hemodynamically unstable or high-risk, which is frequently what we are dealing with in the emergency department. The Glasgow-Blatchford score is a validated risk-assessment score for the prediction of clinical outcomes, including the need for intervention and risk of death.  The score ranges from 0 to 23, with higher scores indicting a higher risk of further bleeding or death. A threshold score of ≥7 has been shown to be the most accurate predictor of whether a patient will need endoscopic treatment.2 There are conflicting results regarding urgent endoscopy (within 6 hours after admission) and mortality.