Search

David Eidenbenz, Alexandre Kottmann, Ken Zafren, Pierre-Nicolas Carron, Roland Albrecht, and Mathieu Pasquier. Noncompressible chest wall in critically buried avalanche victims with cardiac arrest: a case series. High Alt Med Biol. 00:00-00, 2024. Introduction: In avalanche victims with cardiac arrest, a noncompressible chest wall or frozen body is a contraindication to initiating cardiopulmonary resuscitation. The evidence sustaining this recommendation is low. Objective: To describe the characteristics and prehospital management of critically buried avalanche victims declared dead on site, with and without noncompressible chest walls. Methods: Retrospective study including all critically buried avalanche victims declared dead on site by physicians of a helicopter emergency medical service in Switzerland, from 2010 to 2019. The primary outcome was the proportion of victims with a noncompressible chest wall reported in medical records. Secondary outcomes included victims' characteristics and the relevance of the criterion, noncompressible chest wall, for management. Results: Among the 53 included victims, 12 (23%) had noncompressible chest walls. Victims with noncompressible chest walls had significantly longer burial durations (median 1,125 vs. 45 minutes; p < 0.001) and lower core temperatures (median 14 vs. 32°C; p = 0.01). The criterion, noncompressible chest wall, assessed in six victims, was decisive for declaring death on site in four victims. Conclusion: The presence of a noncompressible chest wall does not appear to be a sufficient criterion to allow to declare the death of critically buried avalanche victims. Further clinical information should be sought.

Artificial intelligence (AI) is a rapidly advancing technology in our society. The emergency radiology is an area facing an increase of the number of imaging studies and associated to the necessity to promptly deliver an accurate interpretation. The integration of AI algorithms to assist the clinician in providing analyses of the imaging studies while maintaining adequate diagnostic quality opens up new perspectives. There are numerous potential advantages of the implementation of AI in emergency radiology. However, the use of AI faces new challenges, as the algorithms reliability, data security, responsibility issues, and financial, human and material resources., Competing Interests: Les auteurs n’ont déclaré aucun conflit d’intérêts en relation avec cet article.

Background: The survival of completely buried victims in an avalanche mainly depends on burial duration. Knowledge is limited about survival probability after 60 min of complete burial., Aim: We aimed to study the survival probability and prehospital characteristics of avalanche victims with long burial durations., Methods: We retrospectively included all completely buried avalanche victims with a burial duration of ≥60 min between 1997 and 2018 in Switzerland. Data were extracted from the registry of the Swiss Institute for Snow and Avalanche Research and the prehospital medical records of the physician-staffed helicopter emergency medical services. Avalanche victims buried for ≥24 h or with an unknown survival status were excluded. Survival probability was estimated by using the non-parametric Ayer-Turnbull method and logistic regression. The primary outcome was survival probability., Results: We identified 140 avalanche victims with a burial duration of ≥60 min, of whom 27 (19%) survived. Survival probability shows a slight decrease with increasing burial duration (23% after 60 min, to <6% after 1400 min, p = 0.13). Burial depth was deeper for those who died (100 cm vs 70 cm, p = 0.008). None of the survivors sustained CA during the prehospital phase., Conclusions: The overall survival rate of 19% for completely buried avalanche victims with a long burial duration illustrates the importance of continuing rescue efforts. Avalanche victims in CA after long burial duration without obstructed airway, frozen body or obvious lethal trauma should be considered to be in hypothermic CA, with initiation of cardiopulmonary resuscitation and an evaluation for rewarming with extracorporeal life support., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Although ketamine use in emergency medicine is widespread, studies investigating prehospital use are scarce. Our goal was to assess the self-reported modalities of ketamine use, knowledge of contraindications, and occurrence of adverse events associated with its use by physicians through a prospective online survey., Methods: The survey was administered to physicians working for Air-Glaciers, a Swiss alpine helicopter-based emergency service, and was available between September 24 and November 23, 2018. We enrolled 39 participants (participation rate of 87%) in our study and collected data regarding their characteristics, methods of ketamine use, knowledge of contraindications, and encountered side effects linked to the administration of ketamine. We also included a clinical scenario to investigate an analgesic strategy., Results: Ketamine was considered safe and judged irreplaceable by most physicians. The main reason for ketamine use was acute analgesia during painful procedures, such as manipulation of femur fractures. The doses of ketamine administered with or without fentanyl ranged from 0.2 to 0.7 mg·kg -1 intravenously. Most physicians reported using fentanyl and midazolam along with ketamine. The median dose of midazolam was 2 (interquartile range 1-2) mg for a 70-kg adult. Monitoring and oxygen administration were used infrequently. Hallucinations were the most common adverse events. Knowledge of ketamine contraindications was poor., Conclusions: Ketamine use was reported by mountain rescue physicians to be safe and useful for acute analgesia. Most physicians use fentanyl and midazolam along with ketamine. Adverse neuropsychiatric events were rare. Knowledge regarding contraindications to the administration of ketamine should be improved., (Copyright © 2020 Wilderness Medical Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Drug fever is a little known side effect and should be considered as a differential diagnosis in the presence of fever. Its early recognition is important to avoid unnecessary investigations. Among the 70 most prescribed drugs in primary care in Switzerland, 8 have been linked to drug fever : amoxicillin, atorvastatin, rosuvastatin, esomeprazole, pantoprazole, rivaroxaban, salbutamol and trazodone. There are no specific criterias to distinguish a drug-induced fever. The diagnosis is confirmed with a positive rechallenge test. If a drug fever is suspected, it is recommended to stop the offending agent., Competing Interests: Les auteurs déclarent ne pas avoir de conflits d’intérêts en relation avec cet article. La liste des médicaments a été obtenue grâce à la collaboration non rémunérée avec Interpharma qui est une association d’entreprises pharmaceutiques suisse, comprenant Actelion, Novartis, Roche, AbbVie,Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biogen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Lilly, Lundbeck, Merck, Merck Sharp & Dohme (MSD), Pfizer, Sanofi, Shire, Takeda, UCB et Vifor.