Search

To compare the efficacy and frequency of akathisia and dystonia between the dopamine antagonist headache medications olanzapine, metoclopramide and prochlorperazine.This was a retrospective observational cohort study of patients presenting to a large urban level one trauma center between 2010 and 2018. Inclusion criteria was age ≥ 18 who presented to the emergency department with a chief complaint of headache who received either olanzapine, metoclopramide or prochlorperazine. The primary outcome was need for rescue medication. Secondary outcomes were receiving medication for either akathisia or dystonia. Logistic regression was used to identify differences between the three cohorts up to 72 h from initial presentation.There were 5643 patients who met inclusion criteria. Olanzapine was the most commonly used drug (n = 2994, 53%) followed by prochlorperazine (n = 2100, 37%) and metoclopramide (n = 549, 10%). After adjusting for age and gender, there were no differences in risk for receiving rescue therapy or developing akathisia or dystonia.During initial ED visit and up to 72 h after receiving olanzapine, metoclopramide or prochlorperazine, we found no difference in risk for requiring rescue medication or developing akathisia or dystonia.

The LMA Fastrach (LMA North America, Inc; hereafter termed the intubating laryngeal mask airway [ILMA]) is an extraglottic device designed to facilitate endotracheal intubation. After the endotracheal tube is placed through the lumen of the ILMA into the trachea, the ILMA is removed, using a proprietary stabilizer rod to hold the tube in place.The traditional method of ILMA removal is not optimized for the critically ill patient. It requires the use of unfamiliar equipment, exposes the patient to a significant period without ventilation, and risks tube dislodgement. We designed a simple technique with a double-endotracheal tube setup that addresses these problems using common equipment, allowing for continuous ventilation, and minimizing the risk of tube dislodgement.The traditional method of ILMA removal around an endotracheal tube is not designed for critically ill patients or the physicians taking care of them. This novel technique is designed to improve the usability of the ILMA for physicians and improve airway outcomes for patients.

Abnormal anatomy complicates emergency airway management. In this case, we describe definitive airway management in a critically injured emergency department (ED) patient with a history of partial tracheal resection who had a Montgomery T-tube, a type of T-shaped tracheal stent, in place at the time of the motor vehicle collision. The Montgomery T-tube is not a useful artificial airway during resuscitation, as it lacks a cuff or the necessary adapter for positive pressure ventilation.We describe a case of a 51-year-old man who required emergency airway management after a motor vehicle collision. The patient had a Montgomery T-tube in place, which was removed with facilitation by ketamine sedation and topical anesthesia. The patient was successfully intubated through the tracheal stoma after removal of the T-tube. WHY SHOULD AN EMERGENCY PHYSICIAN BE AWARE OF THIS?: Emergency physicians must recognize the Montgomery T-tube, which resembles a standard tracheostomy tube externally, and have some understanding of how to manage a critically ill patient with this rare device in place. When a patient with a Montgomery T-tube in place requires positive pressure ventilation, the device may require emergent removal and replacement with a cuffed tracheostomy or endotracheal tube.

Study objective When using a standard geometry laryngoscope, experts recommend engaging the hyoepiglottic ligament—a ligament deep to the vallecula not visible to the intubator. The median glossoepiglottic fold (hereafter termed midline vallecular fold) is a superficial mucosal structure, visible to the intubator, that lies in the midline of the vallecula. We aimed to determine whether engaging the midline vallecular fold with a standard geometry blade tip during orotracheal intubation improved laryngeal visualization. Methods We reviewed laryngoscopic videos from intubations by emergency physicians using standard geometry video laryngoscopes over a 2-year period. Two reviewers watched each video and recorded whether the blade tip engaged the midline vallecular fold (obscured the fold with the blade tip) and the best modified Cormack-Lehane grade and percent of glottic opening obtained. We compared laryngeal views in the presence and absence of fold engagement. Results We analyzed 183 discrete laryngoscopic episodes, including 113 instances in which the midline vallecular fold was engaged and 70 instances in which the fold was not engaged. The proportion with a Cormack-Lehane grade 1 or 2a was higher with fold engagement (96%) than without (87%) (absolute difference 9% [95% confidence interval (CI) 1 to 18%]). Ordinal logistic regression demonstrated that midline vallecular fold engagement was associated with a more favorable Cormack-Lehane grade (odds ratio 2.1 [95% CI 1.1 to 4.2]). The median percent of glottic opening score was 95% (interquartile range 90 to 100%) with fold engagement and 95% (65 to 100%) without engagement (median difference 0% [95% CI 0 to 5%]). Conclusion Engaging the midline vallecular fold with the laryngoscope blade tip during orotracheal intubation when using a standard geometry blade was associated with improved laryngeal visualization.

Background and objectivesWe sought to evaluate the effect of adult procedural sedation on cerebral oxygenation measured by near-infrared spectroscopy (rSo2levels), and to assess whether respiratory depression occurring during procedural sedation was associated with decreases in cerebral oxygenation.MethodsWe performed a prospective, observational preliminary study on a convenience sample of adult patients (>18 years) undergoing unscheduled procedural sedation in the ED from August 2017 to September 2018 at Hennepin County Medical Center in Minneapolis, Minnesota. The primary outcome measures were rSo2values by level of sedation achieved and the incidence of cerebral hypoxaemia during procedural sedation (absolute rSo2≤60 or decrease ≥20% from baseline). The secondary outcome is the decrease in rSo2during episodes of respiratory adverse events (AEs), defined by respiratory depression requiring supportive airway measures.ResultsWe enrolled 100 patients (53% female). The median (IQR) rSo2values (%) by each level of sedation achieved on the Observer Assessment of Alertness and Sedation (OAAS) scale 1–5, respectively, were 74 (69–79), 74 (70–79), 74 (69–79), 75 (69–80), 72 (68–76). The incidence of cerebral hypoxaemia at any point within the sedation (absolute rSo22reduction more than 20% from baseline value; the median (IQR) observed minimum rSo2in these patients was 58 (56–59). We observed respiratory depression in 65 patients via standard monitoring; of these, 39 (60%) required at least one supportive airway measure, meeting the definition of a respiratory AE. During these AEs, 15% (6/39) demonstrated cerebral hypoxaemia with a median (IQR) minimum rSo2of 58 (57–59). Four patients (4%) had cerebral hypoxaemia without a respiratory AE.ConclusionCerebral oximetry may represent a useful tool for procedural sedation safety research to detect potential subclinical changes that may be associated with risk, but appears neither sensitive nor specific for routine use in clinical practice.

Background Angioedema, a localized swelling of subcutaneous and submucosal tissues, may involve the upper airway. A subset of patients presenting for emergent evaluation of angioedema will require intubation. Little is known about airway management practices in patients with angioedema requiring intubation in the emergency department (ED). Objective To describe airway management practices in patients intubated for angioedema in the ED. Methods We analyzed data from the National Emergency Airway Registry. All patients with an intubation attempt for angioedema between January 1, 2016 and December 31, 2018 were included. We report univariate descriptive data as proportions with cluster-adjusted 95% confidence intervals. Results Of 19,071 patient encounters, intubation was performed for angioedema in 98 (0.5%). First-attempt success was achieved in 81%, with emergency physicians performing the procedure in 94% of encounters. The most common device used was a flexible endoscope (49%), and 42% of attempts were via a nasal route. Pharmacologic methods included sedation with paralysis (61%), topical anesthesia with or without sedation (13% and 13%, respectively), and sedation only (10%). Among 19 (19%) patients requiring additional attempts, intubation was achieved on second attempt in 10 (53%). The most common adverse events were hypotension (13%) and hypoxemia (12%). Cricothyrotomy occurred in 2 patients (2%). No deaths were observed. Conclusions Angioedema was a rare indication for intubation in the ED setting. Emergency physicians achieved first-attempt success in 81% of encounters and used a broad range of intubation devices and methods, including flexible endoscopic techniques. Cricothyrotomy was rare, and no ED deaths were reported. © 2021 Elsevier Inc.

Background The administration of sedation and neuromuscular blockade to facilitate extraglottic device (EGD) placement is known as rapid sequence airway (RSA). In the emergency department (ED), EGDs are used largely as rescue devices. In select patients, there may be significant advantages to using EGDs over laryngoscopy as the primary airway device in the ED. Objective Our study sought to describe the practice of RSA in the ED, including rates of successful oxygenation, ventilation, and complications from EGD use. Methods We identified patients in the ED between 2007 and 2017 who underwent RSA with the LMA® Fastrach™ (hereafter termed ILMA; Teleflex Medical Europe Ltd., Athlone, Ireland) placed as the first definitive airway management device. A trained abstractor performed chart and video review of the cases to determine patient characteristics, physician use of the ILMA, indication for ILMA placement, success of oxygenation and ventilation, success of intubation, and complications related to the device. Results During the study period, 94 patients underwent RSA with the ILMA. Of those, 93 (99%) were successfully oxygenated and ventilated, and when intubation was attempted, 89% were able to be intubated through the ILMA. The incidence of vomiting and aspiration was 1% and 3%, respectively. There were 30 different attending physicians who supervised RSA and the median number was 2 per physician in the 10-year study period. Conclusion The practice of RSA with the ILMA in the ED is associated with a high rate of successful oxygenation, ventilation, and intubation with infrequent complications, even when performed by physicians with few experiences in the approach.

More than 20,000 emergency department (ED) patients undergo intubation for overdose each year. While the characteristics of patients intubated for overdose and poisoning are well described, little is known about the intubation outcomes of overdose patients in the ED. We quantify the frequency of peri-intubation adverse events for patients intubated in the ED for overdose, and determine whether first attempt success without adverse events differs between patients intubated for overdose and patients intubated for other reasons. We analyzed data from the National Emergency Airway Registry (NEAR), a prospective multicenter registry of ED intubations collected from an international network of 22 academic and community hospitals. We included patients 14 years and older whose first attempt was oral intubation, with data entered into NEAR between 1 January 2016 and 31 December 2018. The primary outcome was successful intubation on the first attempt. We used multivariable logistic regression to determine whether indication was independently associated with successful intubation on the first attempt after adjusting for age, gender, obesity, initial impression of difficult airway, presence of difficult airway characteristics, and use of video laryngoscopy. Secondary outcomes included successful intubation on the first attempt without adverse events, the occurrence of rescue surgical airways, and the occurrence of adverse events. Adverse events included hypoxemia, hypotension, peri-intubation cardiac arrest, bradycardia, mechanical injury to oral or airway structures, vomiting, tachydysrhythmia, esophageal intubation, laryngospasm, and pneumothorax. We analyzed 17,984 patients, including 1,983 (11%) intubated for overdose, and 16,001 (89%) intubated for other indications. Patients intubated for overdose were younger (median age 38 vs 55 years), were less frequently obese (26% vs 34%), and fewer had difficult airway characteristics (38% vs 53%). Overdose patients were more likely to have preoxygenation performed (45% vs 35%), more likely to have apenic oxygenation (39% vs 31%), and more likely to have bougie used (33% vs 17%). First attempt success was 90.5% in patients intubated for overdose and 87.5% in patients intubated for other reasons (absolute difference 3.0%; 95% CI: −1.3 to 7.3). First attempt success without adverse events was higher in overdose patients (85.0%) compared to other patients (78.7%) (absolute difference, 6.3%; 95% CI 1.0 to 11.7%). Overdose patients experienced significantly less hypotension (1.5% vs 4.1%), and tended to have fewer adverse events overall. Multivariable model results were consistent with the unadjusted results including no difference in first pass success (adjusted odd ratio 1.02 [95% CI 0.86–1.23]). There was a higher first pass success without complication in patients intubated for overdose (adjusted odds ratio 1.23; 95% CI 1.07 to1.43). For patients in whom the primary indication for intubation is overdose there is an increased chance of first attempt success without adverse event.

Study objective Intramuscular medications are commonly used to treat agitation in the emergency department (ED). The purpose of this study is to compare intramuscular droperidol and olanzapine for treating agitation. Methods This was a prospective observational study of ED patients receiving intramuscular droperidol or olanzapine for acute agitation. The treating physician determined the medication and dose; however, over time drug shortages made either olanzapine (July to September 2019) or droperidol (November 2019 to March 2020) unavailable, creating a natural experiment. The primary outcome was time to adequate sedation, assessed by the Altered Mental Status Scale (AMSS), defined as time to AMSS score less than or equal to 0. Results We analyzed 1,257 patients (median age 42 years; 73% men); 538 received droperidol (median dose 5 mg) and 719 received olanzapine (median dose 10 mg). The majority of patients (1,086; 86%) had agitation owing to alcohol intoxication. Time to adequate sedation was 16 minutes (interquartile range 10 to 30 minutes) for droperidol and 17.5 minutes (interquartile range 10 to 30 minutes) for olanzapine (absolute difference –0.7 minutes; 95% confidence interval –2.1 to 0.5 minutes). Adjusted Cox proportional hazard model analysis revealed no difference between groups in time to sedation (hazard ratio for adequate sedation for droperidol compared with olanzapine 1.12; 95% confidence interval 1.00 to 1.25). Patients receiving olanzapine were more likely to receive additional medications for sedation (droperidol 17%; olanzapine 24%; absolute difference –8% [95% confidence interval –12% to –3%]). We observed no difference between drugs regarding adverse effects except for extrapyramidal adverse effects, which were more common with droperidol (n=6; 1%) than olanzapine (n=1; 0.1%). Conclusion We found no difference in time to adequate sedation between intramuscular droperidol and olanzapine.

N/A

Severe hypothermia (core body temperature 28°C) is life-threatening and predisposes to cardiac arrest. The comparative effectiveness of different active internal rewarming methods in an urban U.S. population is unknown. We aim to compare outcomes between hypothermic emergency department (ED) patients rewarmed conventionally using an intravascular rewarming catheter or warm fluid lavage versus those rewarmed using extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO).We performed a retrospective cohort analysis of adults with severe hypothermia due to outdoor exposure presenting to an urban ED in Minnesota, 2007-2021. The primary outcome was hospital survival. We also calculated the rewarming rate in the 4 h after ED arrival and compared these data between patients rewarmed with ECMO (the extracorporeal rewarming group) versus without ECMO (the conventional rewarming group). We repeated these analyses in the subgroup of patients with cardiac arrest.We analyzed 44 hypothermic ED patients: 25 patients in the extracorporeal rewarming group (median temperature 24.1°C, 84% with cardiac arrest) and 19 patients in the conventional rewarming group (median temperature 26.3°C, 37% with cardiac arrest; 89% received an intravascular rewarming catheter). The median rewarming rate was greater in the extracorporeal versus conventional group (2.3°C/h vs. 1.5°C/h, absolute difference 0.8°C/h, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.3-1.2°C/h) yet hospital survival was similar (68% vs. 74%). Among patients with cardiac arrest, hospital survival was greater in the extracorporeal versus conventional group (71% vs. 29%, absolute difference 42%, 95% CI 4%-82%).Among ED patients with severe hypothermia and cardiac arrest, survival was significantly higher with ECMO versus conventional rewarming. Among all hypothermic patients, ECMO use was associated with faster rewarming than conventional methods.

OBJECTIVES: In mechanically ventilated patients, awareness with paralysis (AWP) can have devastating consequences, including post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), depression, and thoughts of suicide. Single-center data from the emergency department (ED) demonstrate an event rate for AWP factors higher than that reported from the operating room. However, there remains a lack of data on AWP among critically ill, mechanically ventilated patients. The objective was to assess the proportion of ED patients experiencing AWP and investigate modifiable variables associated with its occurrence. DESIGN: An a priori planned secondary analysis of a multicenter, prospective, before-and-after clinical trial. SETTING: The ED of three academic medical centers. PATIENTS: Mechanically ventilated adult patients that received neuromuscular blockers. INTERVENTIONS: None MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: All data related to sedation and analgesia were collected. AWP was the primary outcome, assessed with the modified Brice questionnaire, and was independently adjudicated by three expert reviewers. Perceived threat, in the causal pathway for PTSD, was the secondary outcome. A total of 388 patients were studied. The proportion of patients experiencing AWP was 3.4% (n= 13), the majority of whom received rocuronium (n= 12/13; 92.3%). Among patients who received rocuronium, 5.5% (n= 12/230) experienced AWP, compared to 0.6% (n= 1/158) among patients who did not receive rocuronium in the ED [odds ratio, 8.64; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.11 to 67.15]. Patients experiencing AWP had a higher mean (standard deviation) threat perception scale score, compared to patients without AWP [15.6 (5.8) vs. 7.7 (6.0), p < 0.01]. CONCLUSIONS: AWP was present in a concerning proportion of mechanically ventilated ED patients, was associated with rocuronium exposure in the ED, and led to increased levels of perceived threat, placing patients at greater risk for PTSD. Studies that aim to further quantify AWP in this vulnerable population and eliminate its occurrence are urgently needed.

Critically ill patients sometimes remember periods of neuromuscular blockade.What is the prevalence of recalled awareness during paralysis in patients who underwent emergency tracheal intubation and mechanical ventilation, and what clinical variables are associated with this outcome?This study analyzed data from a prospectively collected continuous quality improvement database of emergency tracheal intubation in an urban, county hospital. Patients who received a neuromuscular blocking agent to facilitate emergency tracheal intubation in the ED were included. The database contained details of intubation management, including medications received and patient mental status prior to intubation. Patient recall of awareness of paralysis was assessed by trained staff during an in-person interview following extubation using a modified Brice questionnaire. For this analysis, three expert reviewers used these data to adjudicate whether patients may have had awareness of paralysis, the primary outcome. A logistic regression model was constructed to determine whether clinical variables were associated with the primary outcome.A total of 886 patients were analyzed. There were 66 patients (7.4%; 95% CI, 5.8-9.4) determined to possibly (61 patients) or definitely (5 patients) have experienced and recalled awareness of paralysis. A logistic regression model revealed that a decreased level of consciousness prior to intubation was associated with lower odds of awareness (adjusted OR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.22-0.69), whereas the class of neuromuscular blocking agent used, sedative used, preintubation shock index, and postintubation sedation were not significantly associated with recall of this outcome.Among patients intubated emergently using a neuromuscular blocking agent, 7.4% of patients recalled awareness without being able to move, which was more likely when patients had a normal level of consciousness prior to intubation.

To determine the incidence of peri-intubation cardiac arrest through analysis of a multi-center Emergency Department (ED) airway registry and to report associated clinical characteristics.This is a secondary analysis of prospectively collected data (National Emergency Airway Registry) comprising ED endotracheal intubations (ETIs) of subjects14 years old from 2016 to 2018. We excluded those with cardiac arrest prior to intubation. The primary outcome was peri-intubation cardiac arrest. Multivariable logistic regression generated adjusted odds ratios (aOR) of variables associated with this outcome, controlling for clinical features, difficult airway characteristics, and ETI modality.Of 15,776 subjects who met selection criteria, 157 (1.0%, 95% CI 0.9-1.2%) experienced peri-intubation cardiac arrest. Pre-intubation systolic blood pressure100 mm Hg (aOR 6.2, 95% CI 2.5-8.5), pre-intubation oxygen saturation90% (aOR 3.1, 95% CI 2.0-4.8), and clinician-reported need for immediate intubation without time for full preparation (aOR 1.8, 95% CI, 1.2-2.7) were associated with higher likelihood of peri-intubation cardiac arrest. The association between pre-intubation shock and cardiac arrest persisted in additional modeling stratified by ETI indication, induction agent, and oxygenation status.Peri-intubation cardiac arrest for patients undergoing ETI in the ED is rare. Higher likelihood of arrest occurs in patients with pre-intubation shock or hypoxemia. Prospective trials are necessary to determine whether a protocol to optimize pre-intubation haemodynamics and oxygenation mitigates the risk of peri-intubation cardiac arrest.

Study objective Some contend that patients with acute alcohol or illicit substance intoxication should be treated in outpatient detoxification centers rather than in the ED. However, these patients often have underlying acute medical needs. We sought to determine the frequency of medical interventions required by ED patients with alcohol or illicit substance intoxication. Methods This was a prospective observational study of consecutive ED patients presenting to an urban tertiary care ED with altered mental status due to alcohol or illicit substance use. We performed data collection for patients deemed to be low-risk for complications, as defined by receiving care in an intoxication observation unit. Trained staff observed and recorded all medical interventions, including medications administered, diagnostic testing, procedures performed, and airway interventions. The incidence of agitation was recorded using the Altered Mental Status Scale (AMSS, ordinal scale from −4 to +4, where +4 is most agitated). The data analysis is descriptive. Results This analysis included 2685 encounters (1645 unique patients; median age 39; 73% male) from January to May 2019. Average breath alcohol concentration was 0.20 g/dL (range 0.00–0.47). There were 89% encounters with alcohol intoxication, and in 17% encounters the patient was suspected or known to have drug intoxication (either alone or in conjunction with alcohol use). On arrival to the ED, 372 (14%) had agitation (AMSS +1 or higher) and 32 (1%) were profoundly agitated (AMSS +4). In total, 1526 (56%) received at least one intervention that could not be provided by a local detoxification or sobering facility. Of the study population, 955 (36%) received a sedating medication, 903 (34%) required physical restraints for patients or staff safety, 575 (21%) underwent imaging studies, 318 (12%) underwent laboratory testing, 367 (13%) received another intervention (IV access, EKG, splinting, wound care, etc). Additionally, 111 (4%) patients received an airway intervention (19 intubation, 23 nasal airway, 85 supplemental oxygen) and 275 (10%) required repositioning to protect the airway. There were 168 (6%) patients admitted to the hospital. Conclusion In this population of relatively low-risk ED patients with drug and alcohol intoxication, a substantial proportion of patients received medical interventions.

Rapid sequence intubation (RSI), defined as near-simultaneous administration of a sedative and neuromuscular blocking agent, is the most common and successful method of tracheal intubation in the emergency department. However, RSI is sometimes avoided when the physician believes there is a risk of a can't intubate/can't oxygenate scenario or critical hypoxemia because of distorted anatomy or apnea intolerance. Traditionally, topical anesthesia alone or in combination with low-dose sedation are used when physicians deem RSI too risky. Recently, a ketamine-only strategy has been suggested as an alternative approach.We compared first attempt success and complications between ketamine-only, topical anesthesia alone or with low-dose sedation, and RSI approaches.We analyzed registry data from the National Emergency Airway Registry, comprising emergency department intubation data from 25 centers from January 2016 to December 2018. We excluded pediatric patients (14 years of age), those in cardiac and respiratory arrest, or those with an alternate pharmacologic approach (i.e., neuromuscular blocking agent only or nonketamine sedative alone). We analyzed first attempt intubation success and adverse events across the 3 intubation approaches. We calculated differences in outcomes between the ketamine-only and topical anesthesia groups.During the study period, 12,511 of 19,071 intubation encounters met inclusion criteria, including 102 (0.8%) intubated with ketamine alone, 80 (0.6%) who had intubation facilitated by topical anesthesia, and 12,329 (98.5%) who underwent RSI. Unadjusted first attempt success was 61%, 85%, and 90% for the 3 groups, respectively. Hypoxemia (defined as oxygen saturation90%) occurred in 16%, 13%, and 8% of patients during the first attempt, respectively. At least 1 adverse event occurred in 32%, 19%, and 14% of the courses of intubation for the 3 groups, respectively. In comparing the ketamine-only and topical anesthesia groups, the difference in first pass success was -24% (95% confidence interval -37% to -12%), and the difference in number of cases with ≥1 adverse event was 13% (95% confidence interval 0-25%), both favoring the topical anesthesia group.Although sometimes advocated, the ketamine-only intubation approach is uncommon and is associated with lower success and higher complications compared with topical anesthesia and RSI approaches.

SARS-CoV-2 viral entry may disrupt angiotensin II (AII) homeostasis, contributing to COVID-19 induced lung injury. AII type 1 receptor blockade mitigates lung injury in preclinical models, although data in humans with COVID-19 remain mixed.To test the efficacy of losartan to reduce lung injury in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.This blinded, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial was conducted in 13 hospitals in the United States from April 2020 to February 2021. Hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and a respiratory sequential organ failure assessment score of at least 1 and not already using a renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitor were eligible for participation. Data were analyzed from April 19 to August 24, 2021.Losartan 50 mg orally twice daily vs equivalent placebo for 10 days or until hospital discharge.The primary outcome was the imputed arterial partial pressure of oxygen to fraction of inspired oxygen (Pao2:Fio2) ratio at 7 days. Secondary outcomes included ordinal COVID-19 severity; days without supplemental o2, ventilation, or vasopressors; and mortality. Losartan pharmacokinetics and RAAS components (AII, angiotensin-[1-7] and angiotensin-converting enzymes 1 and 2)] were measured in a subgroup of participants.A total of 205 participants (mean [SD] age, 55.2 [15.7] years; 123 [60.0%] men) were randomized, with 101 participants assigned to losartan and 104 participants assigned to placebo. Compared with placebo, losartan did not significantly affect Pao2:Fio2 ratio at 7 days (difference, -24.8 [95%, -55.6 to 6.1]; P = .12). Compared with placebo, losartan did not improve any secondary clinical outcomes and led to fewer vasopressor-free days than placebo (median [IQR], 9.4 [9.1-9.8] vasopressor-free days vs 8.7 [8.2-9.3] vasopressor-free days).This randomized clinical trial found that initiation of orally administered losartan to hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and acute lung injury did not improve Pao2:Fio2 ratio at 7 days. These data may have implications for ongoing clinical trials.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04312009.

Background In patients requiring emergency rapid sequence intubation (RSI), 100% oxygen is often delivered for preoxygenation to replace alveolar nitrogen with oxygen. Sometimes, however, preoxygenation devices are prematurely removed from the patient prior to the onset of apnea, which can lead to rapid loss of preoxygenation. Objective We sought to determine the elapsed time, on average, between removing the oxygen source and the loss of preoxygenation among non–critically ill patients in the emergency department (ED). Methods We conducted a prospective, crossover study of non–critically ill patients in the ED. Each patient received two identical preoxygenation trials for 4 min using a non–rebreather mask with oxygen flow at flush rate and a nasal cannula with oxygen flow at 10 L/min. After each preoxygenation trial, patients underwent two trials in random order while continuing spontaneous breathing: 1) removal of both oxygen sources and 2) removal of non–rebreather mask with nasal cannula left in place. We defined loss of preoxygenation as an end-tidal oxygen (exhaled oxygen percentage; EtO2) value Results We enrolled 42 patients, median age was 43 years (interquartile range [IQR] 30 to 54 years) and 72% were male. Median time to loss of preoxygenation was 20 s (IQR 17–25 s, 4.5 breaths) when all oxygen devices were removed, and 39 s (IQR 21–56 s, 8 breaths) when the nasal cannula was left in place. Conclusions In this population of non–critically ill ED patients, most had loss of preoxygenation after 5 breaths if all oxygen devices were removed, and after 8 breaths if a nasal cannula was left in place. These data suggest that during ED RSI, preoxygenation devices should be left in place until the patient is completely apneic.

BACKGROUND The optimal agent to treat acute agitation in the emergency department (ED) has not been determined. The objective of this study was to compare the effectiveness and safety of intramuscular droperidol, ziprasidone, and lorazepam for acute agitation in the ED. METHODS This was a randomized, double-blind trial of ED patients with acute agitation requiring parenteral sedation. The study was conducted under exception from informed consent (21 CFR 50.24) from July 2004 to March 2005. Patients were randomized to receive 5 mg of droperidol, 10 mg of ziprasidone, 20 mg of ziprasidone, or 2 mg of lorazepam intramuscularly. We recorded Altered Mental Status Scale (AMSS) scores, nasal end-tidal carbon dioxide (ETCO2 ), and pulse oximetry (SpO2 ) at 0, 15, 30, 45, 60, 90, and 120 minutes as well as QTc durations and dysrhythmias. Respiratory depression was defined as a change in ETCO2 consistent with respiratory depression or SpO2

Conducted electrical weapons (CEW) are ubiquitous in law enforcement given their unique ability to physically incapacitate violently resisting subjects. Early use of animal models to study CEW incapacitation effectiveness (e.g. porcine model with 4-limb strain gauges) proved to be poorly predictive of human incapacitation effectiveness. In a previously published human study, we developed a methodology for the prospective assessment of the incapacitation effectiveness of CEWs in highly motivated human subjects. Here we use this methodology in Part 1 to compare the incapacitation effectiveness of the newly released Axon® (formerly TASER® International) T(ASER) 7 to the TASER X26E, the “gold standard”, and the TASER X2, a current model. The T7 has a new “adaptive cross-connect” technology that may improve incapacitation effectiveness in the scenario of small spreads between probe pairs, a common cause of weapon “failure” in the field. In Part 2, we use our methodology to test the functionality of the T7 cross-connect technology by comparing different bay and probe configurations. This is the first published study in the literature comparing different CEW models using this human model. For Part 1, 29 subjects completed the study and had data available for analysis. For Part 2, 21 subjects completed the study and had data available for analysis. The subjects were motivated to complete the task of reaching a suspended martial arts dummy 3.4 m (11 ft) away while being exposed “under power” to the CEW. In Part 1, subjects were assigned to 1 of 6 groups with probe spreads of 10, 20, and 30 cm (4, 8, 12 in). Subjects were exposed to a “control” CEW (either the X2 or X26E) and the T7 on alternating sides. Exposures with the X2 and T7 included 2 bay-exposures. In Part 2, 21 subjects were assigned to 1 of 5 groups of different T7 bay and probe configurations all with a theoretical effective spread of 30 cm (12 in). Subjects were rated on their progress towards successfully reaching the dummy and on the extent of limb incapacitation using a quasi-blinded expert-observer scoring panel based on high-speed video review. In Part 1, all CEW models achieved maximal or near-maximal subject control with the 30 cm probe spread. With probe spreads of 10 and 20 cm the pooled data showed the T7 to be superior to the X2 for goal achievement (p

Background Extraglottic devices, such as the intubating laryngeal mask airway (ILMA), facilitate ventilation and oxygenation and are useful for emergency airway management, especially as rescue devices. In the operating room setting the ILMA has been highly successful. However, its performance in the ED has not been described. We sought to describe the indications for and success of the ILMA when used in the ED. Methods We performed retrospective, observational study of patients who had an LMA® Fastrach™ (hereafter termed ILMA) placed in a single ED between 2007 and 2017. Patients were identified by keyword search of ED notes in the electronic medical record. Trained abstractors reviewed charts and videos to determine patient characteristics, indication for ILMA placement, success of oxygenation and ventilation, intubation methods and success, and complications related to the device. Results During the study period 218 patients had an ILMA placed in the ED. The ILMA was used as a primary device in 118 patients (54%), and as a rescue device in 100 patients (46%). The median number of ILMA uses per faculty physician during the study period was 3. The ILMA oxygenated and ventilated successfully in 212 instances (98%), including 96 times (96%) when used as a rescue airway. Failure of oxygenation was due to tracheal injury (2), abnormal laryngeal inlet anatomy (2), or poor operator technique (1). Intubation through the ILMA was successful in 159 of 192 patients (83%), including a success rate of 81% (112 of 139 patients) with blind intubation. Conclusion The ILMA was highly successful in oxygenation, with reasonable intubation success, even when used infrequently by emergency physicians. The ILMA should be considered a valuable primary and rescue intubation device in the ED.

Ventilator tidal volumes of8 mL/kg of predicted body weight (PBW) may increase the risk of lung injury. We sought to evaluate the impact of a quality improvement intervention among intubated Emergency Department (ED) patients to protocolize the prescription of low tidal volume ventilation.In this before-and-after study, the average tidal volume delivered to ED patients receiving volume assist-control ventilation was compared before (2007-2014) and after (2015-2016) implementation of a ventilator initiation protocol (the quality improvement intervention). The intervention emphasized 1) measurement of the patient's height to calculate PBW and therefore tailor the tidal volume to estimated lung size (8 mL/kg PBW), and 2) focused education and reference materials for ED physicians and respiratory therapists.Among ventilated ED patients meeting inclusion criteria in the before (N = 2185) and after (N = 774) cohorts, the mean (±SD) tidal volume decreased from 9.0 ± 1.4 mL/kg to 7.2 ± 0.9 mL/kg PBW following the intervention (absolute difference 1.8 mL/kg, 95% confidence interval 1.7 to 1.9 mL/kg, p 0.001). The proportion of patients receiving low tidal volume ventilation increased after the intervention (72%), as compared to before (23%). Low tidal volume ventilation continued to be utilized at 24 h after ICU admission in patients who remained intubated in the cohort following the intervention (mean tidal volume 7.3 mL/kg PBW).Pairing a ventilator initiation protocol with focused education and resources for emergency physicians and respiratory therapists was associated with a significant reduction in tidal volume delivered to ED patients.

IntroductionAmong critically ill patients undergoing orotracheal intubation in the emergency department (ED) or intensive care unit (ICU), failure to visualise the vocal cords and intubate the trachea on the first attempt is associated with an increased risk of complications. Two types of laryngoscopes are commonly available: direct laryngoscopes and video laryngoscopes. For critically ill adults undergoing emergency tracheal intubation, it remains uncertain whether the use of a video laryngoscope increases the incidence of successful intubation on the first attempt compared with the use of a direct laryngoscope.Methods and analysisTheDirEct versusVIdeo LaryngosCopE(DEVICE) trial is a prospective, multicentre, non-blinded, randomised trial being conducted in 7 EDs and 10 ICUs in the USA. The trial plans to enrol up to 2000 critically ill adults undergoing orotracheal intubation with a laryngoscope. Eligible patients are randomised 1:1 to the use of a video laryngoscope or a direct laryngoscope for the first intubation attempt. The primary outcome is successful intubation on the first attempt. The secondary outcome is the incidence of severe complications between induction and 2 min after intubation, defined as the occurrence of one or more of the following: severe hypoxaemia (lowest oxygen saturation Ethics and disseminationThe trial protocol was approved with waiver of informed consent by the single institutional review board at Vanderbilt University Medical Center and the Human Research Protection Office of the Department of Defense. The results will be presented at scientific conferences and submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal.Trial registration numberClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT05239195).

IMPORTANCE: For critically ill adults undergoing emergency tracheal intubation, failure to intubate the trachea on the first attempt occurs in up to 20% of cases and is associated with severe hypoxemia and cardiac arrest. Whether using a tracheal tube introducer (“bougie”) increases the likelihood of successful intubation compared with using an endotracheal tube with stylet remains uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of use of a bougie vs an endotracheal tube with stylet on successful intubation on the first attempt. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The Bougie or Stylet in Patients Undergoing Intubation Emergently (BOUGIE) trial was a multicenter, randomized clinical trial among 1102 critically ill adults undergoing tracheal intubation in 7 emergency departments and 8 intensive care units in the US between April 29, 2019, and February 14, 2021; the date of final follow-up was March 14, 2021. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned to use of a bougie (n = 556) or use of an endotracheal tube with stylet (n = 546). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was successful intubation on the first attempt. The secondary outcome was the incidence of severe hypoxemia, defined as a peripheral oxygen saturation less than 80%. RESULTS: Among 1106 patients randomized, 1102 (99.6%) completed the trial and were included in the primary analysis (median age, 58 years; 41.0% women). Successful intubation on the first attempt occurred in 447 patients (80.4%) in the bougie group and 453 patients (83.0%) in the stylet group (absolute risk difference, −2.6 percentage points [95% CI, −7.3 to 2.2]; P = .27). A total of 58 patients (11.0%) in the bougie group experienced severe hypoxemia, compared with 46 patients (8.8%) in the stylet group (absolute risk difference, 2.2 percentage points [95% CI, −1.6 to 6.0]). Esophageal intubation occurred in 4 patients (0.7%) in the bougie group and 5 patients (0.9%) in the stylet group, pneumothorax was present after intubation in 14 patients (2.5%) in the bougie group and 15 patients (2.7%) in the stylet group, and injury to oral, glottic, or thoracic structures occurred in 0 patients in the bougie group and 3 patients (0.5%) in the stylet group. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among critically ill adults undergoing tracheal intubation, use of a bougie did not significantly increase the incidence of successful intubation on the first attempt compared with use of an endotracheal tube with stylet. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03928925

BackgroundSARS-CoV-2 viral entry may disrupt angiotensin II (Ang II) homeostasis in part via ACE2 downregulation, potentially contributing to COVID-19 induced lung injury. Preclinical models of viral pneumonias that utilize ACE2 demonstrate Ang II type 1 receptor (AT1R) blockade mitigates lung injury, though observational COVID-19 data addressing the effect of AT1R blockade remain mixed.MethodsMulticenter, blinded, placebo-controlled randomized trial of losartan (50 mg PO twice daily for 10 days) versus placebo. Hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and a respiratory sequential organ failure assessment score of at least 1 and not already taking a renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitor were eligible. The primary outcome was the imputed partial pressure of oxygen to fraction of inspired oxygen (PaO2/FiO2) ratio at 7 days. Secondary outcomes included ordinal COVID-19 severity, oxygen, ventilator, and vasopressor-free days, and mortality. Losartan pharmacokinetics (PK) and RAAS components [Ang II, angiotensin-(1–7) (Ang-(1–7)), ACE, ACE2] were measured in a subgroup of participants.FindingsFrom April 2020 - February 2021, 205 participants were randomized, 101 to losartan and 104 to placebo. Compared to placebo, losartan did not significantly affect PaO2/FiO2 ratio at 7 days [difference of -24.8 (95% -55.6 to 6.1; p=0.12)]. Losartan did not improve any secondary clinical outcome, but worsened vasopressor-free days. PK data were consistent with appropriate steady-state concentrations, but we observed no significant effect of losartan on RAAS components.InterpretationInitiation of orally administered losartan to hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and acute lung injury does not improve PaO2 / FiO2 ratio at 7 days. These data may have implications for ongoing clinical trials.Trial RegistrationLosartan for Patients With COVID-19 Requiring Hospitalization (NCT04312009), https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04312009

Given signs and symptoms of hyperthyroidism are non-specific, thyroid studies may be completed to evaluate patients with vague complaints such as tachycardia in the emergency department (ED). We sought to determine how often a new diagnosis of hyperthyroidism was made in patients who underwent thyroid laboratory testing in the ED.The primary outcome of this study was a new diagnosis in the ED, or in the following 30 days, of hyperthyroidism or thyrotoxicosis following ED thyroid laboratory testing.This was a retrospective chart review study in a single ED of all patients who had a TSH or free T4 ordered from 2007 to 2018, or a TSH value below, or a free T4 higher than the local reference ranges. Patients with a diagnosis of hypothyroidism were excluded.12,366 patients underwent thyroid laboratory testing, and 12,244 patients were included. Of included patients, 655(5.4%) had abnormal thyroid studies, and 95(0.8%) patients received a new diagnosis of hyperthyroidism or thyrotoxicosis. The sensitivity and specificity of tachycardia for the diagnosis of hyperthyroidism was 70%(95% CI 62% to 77%) and 62%(95% CI 61% to 63%), respectively; and the positive and negative likelihood ratios were 1.8(95% CI 1.7 to 2.0) and 0.5(95% CI 0.4 to 0.6), respectively.This study suggests that thyroid laboratory studies may be best used for a focused assessment for thyroid disorders rather than a screening tool for patients with one symptom of hyperthyroidism.

Background The SARS-CoV-2 virus enters cells via Angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2), disrupting the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone axis, potentially contributing to lung injury. Treatment with angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), such as losartan, may mitigate these effects, though induction of ACE2 could increase viral entry, replication, and worsen disease. Methods This study represents a placebo-controlled blinded randomized clinical trial (RCT) to test the efficacy of losartan on outpatients with COVID-19 across three hospital systems with numerous community sites in Minnesota, U.S. Participants included symptomatic outpatients with COVID-19 not already taking ACE-inhibitors or ARBs, enrolled within 7 days of symptom onset. Patients were randomized to 1:1 losartan (25 mg orally twice daily unless estimated glomerular filtration rate, eGFR, was reduced, when dosing was reduced to once daily) versus placebo for 10 days, and all patients and outcome assesors were blinded. The primary outcome was all-cause hospitalization within 15 days. Secondary outcomes included functional status, dyspnea, temperature, and viral load. (clinicatrials.gov, NCT04311177, closed to new participants) Findings From April to November 2020, 117 participants were randomized 58 to losartan and 59 to placebo, and all were analyzed under intent to treat principles. The primary outcome did not differ significantly between the two arms based on Barnard's test [losartan arm: 3 events (5.2% 95% CI 1.1, 14.4%) versus placebo arm: 1 event (1.7%; 95% CI 0.0, 9.1%)]; proportion difference -3.5% (95% CI -13.2, 4.8%); p = 0.32]. Viral loads were not statistically different between treatment groups at any time point. Adverse events per 10 patient days did not differ signifcantly [0.33 (95% CI 0.22–0.49) for losartan vs. 0.37 (95% CI 0.25–0.55) for placebo]. Due to a lower than expected hospitalization rate and low likelihood of a clinically important treatment effect, the trial was terminated early. Interpretation In this multicenter blinded RCT for outpatients with mild symptomatic COVID-19 disease, losartan did not reduce hospitalizations, though assessment was limited by low event rate. Importantly, viral load was not statistically affected by treatment. This study does not support initiation of losartan for low-risk outpatients. Funding This study was supported by Minnesota Partnership for Biotechnology and Medical Genomics (CON000000076883).

Background The intubating laryngeal mask airway (ILMA) allows providers to blindly intubate through the device. We report a case of foreign material obstructing passage of an endotracheal tube (ET) through an ILMA. Case Report A 45-year-old man with unknown past medical history was found obtunded with an apparent intentional drug and alcohol overdose, and required tracheal intubation. We opted to use an ILMA to optimize preoxygenation prior to intubation. His upper dentures were removed and an ILMA was inserted without complication; ventilation was easily performed. Blind tracheal intubation was attempted; the ET was inserted through the ILMA and was unable to be advanced past 15 cm despite multiple attempts, including repositioning the ILMA and rotating the ET. The ILMA was removed to prepare for video laryngoscopy. He was subsequently successfully intubated using a standard geometry video laryngoscope, which showed no anatomical abnormalities. After the case, the ILMA was inspected and the bowl of the ILMA was found to be occluded with denture adhesive. Why Should an Emergency Physician Be Aware of This? This case report demonstrates that it is possible that foreign material within the ILMA can make successful intubation impossible, despite successful placement and ventilation through the device. Maneuvers may be performed to attempt successful ET intubation, but when unsuccessful, removal of the ILMA and alternate airway management must be performed.

Study objective Laryngeal tubes are commonly used by emergency medical services (EMS) personnel for out-of-hospital advanced airway management. The emergency department (ED) management of EMS-placed laryngeal tubes is unknown. We seek to describe ED airway management techniques, success, and complications of patients receiving EMS laryngeal tubes. Methods Using a keyword text search of ED notes, we identified patients who arrived at our ED with a laryngeal tube from 2010 through 2017. We performed structured chart and video reviews for all eligible patients. In our ED, emergency physicians perform all airway management, and there is no protocol dictating airway management for patients arriving with a laryngeal tube. Using descriptive methods, we report the techniques, success, and complications of ED airway management. Results We analyzed data on 647 patients receiving out-of-hospital laryngeal tubes, including 472 (73%) with cardiac arrest from medical causes, 75 (21%) with cardiac arrest from trauma, and 100 (15%) with other conditions. For 580 patients (89%), emergency physicians exchanged the laryngeal tube for a definitive airway in the ED. Of the 67 patients not intubated in the ED, 66 died in the ED without further airway management. Of the 580 patients intubated in the ED, orotracheal intubation was the first method attempted for 578 (>99%) and was successful on the first attempt for 515 of 578 (89%). Macintosh video laryngoscopy (88% of initial attempts) and a bougie (68% of initial attempts) were commonly used adjuncts. For 345 of 578 patients (60%), the laryngeal tube was removed before intubation attempts. For 112 of 578 patients (19%), the first intubation attempt occurred with the deflated laryngeal tube left in place. Three patients ( Conclusion In this cohort, emergency physicians successfully exchanged an out-of-hospital laryngeal tube for an endotracheal tube, using commonly available airway management techniques. ED clinicians should be familiar with techniques for exchanging out-of-hospital extraglottic airways for an endotracheal tube.

BACKGROUND: Though the use of small bolus doses of vasopressors, termed “push dose pressors,” has become common in emergency medicine, data examining this practice are scant. Push dose pressors frequently involve bedside dilution, which may result in errors and adverse events. The objective of this study was to assess for instances of human error and adverse hemodynamic events during push dose pressor use in the emergency department. METHODS: This was a structured chart and video review of all patients age ≥ 16 years undergoing resuscitation and receiving push dose pressors from a single center from January 2010 to November 2017. Push dose pressors were defined as intended intravenous boluses of phenylephrine (any dose) or epinephrine (≤ 100 mcg). RESULTS: A total of 249 patients were analyzed. Median age was 60 years (range, 16–97), 58% were male, 49% survived to discharge. Median initial epinephrine dose was 20 mcg (n = 139, IQR 10–100, range 1–100); median phenylephrine dose was 100 mcg (n = 110, IQR 100–100, range 25–10,000). Adverse hemodynamic events occurred in 98 patients (39%); 30 in the phenylephrine group (27%; 95% CI, 19–36%), and 68 in the epinephrine group (50%; 95% CI, 41–58%). Human errors were observed in 47 patients (19%), including 7 patients (3%) experiencing dosing errors (all overdoses; range, 2.5- to 100-fold) and 43 patients (17%) with a documentation error. Only one dosing error occurred when a pharmacist was present. CONCLUSIONS: Human errors and adverse hemodynamic events were common with the use of push dose pressors in the emergency department. Adverse hemodynamic events were more common than in previous studies. Future research should determine if push dose pressors improve outcomes and if so, how to safely implement them into practice. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s13181-019-00716-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.