Search

Background Acute pulmonary embolism (PE) mortality is linked to abrupt rises in pulmonary artery (PA) pressure due to mechanical obstruction and pulmonary vasoconstriction, leading to right ventricular (RV) dilation, increased RV wall tension and oxygen demand, but compromised right coronary artery oxygen supply. Oxygen is a known pulmonary vasodilator, and in preclinical animal models of PE, supplemental oxygen reduces PA pressures and improves RV function. However, the mechanisms driving these interactions, especially in humans, remain poorly understood. The overall objective of the supplemental oxygen in pulmonary embolism (SO-PE) study is to investigate the mechanisms of supplemental oxygen in patients with acute PE.Methods and analysis This randomised, double-blind, cross-over trial at Massachusetts General Hospital will include adult patients with acute PE and evidence of RV dysfunction but without hypoxaemia (SaO2 ≥90% on room air). We will enrol 80 patients, each serving as their own control, with 40 randomised to start on supplemental oxygen, and 40 randomised to start on room air. Over 180 min, patients will alternate between supplemental oxygen delivered by non-rebreather mask (60% FiO2) and room air (21% FiO2). The primary outcome will be the difference in pulmonary artery systolic pressure with and without oxygen. Secondary outcomes include additional echocardiographic measures, metabolomic profiles, vital signs and dyspnoea scores. Echocardiographic data will be compared by a paired t-test or Wilcoxon signed-rank test. For metabolomic analyses, we will perform multivariable mixed effects logistic regression models and calculate false discovery rate (q-value ≤0.05) to account for multiple comparisons. Data will be collected in compliance with National Institutes of Health and National Heart Lung and Blood Institute (NHLBI) policies for data and safety monitoring.Ethics and dissemination The SO-PE study is funded by the NHLBI and has been approved by the Institutional Review Board of Mass General Brigham (no. 2023P000252). The study will comply with the Helsinki Declaration on medical research involving human subjects. All participants will provide prospective, written informed consent.Trial registration number NCT05891886.

Background: Chest imaging, including chest X-ray (CXR) and computed tomography (CT), can be a helpful adjunct to nucleic acid test (NAT) in the diagnosis and management of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). Lung point of care ultrasound (POCUS), particularly with handheld devices, is an imaging alternative that is rapid, highly portable, and more accessible in low-resource settings. A standardized POCUS scanning protocol has been proposed to assess the severity of COVID-19 pneumonia, but it has not been sufficiently validated to assess diagnostic accuracy for COVID-19 pneumonia. Purpose: To assess the diagnostic performance of a standardized lung POCUS protocol using a handheld POCUS device to detect patients with either a positive NAT or a COVID-19-typical pattern on CT scan. Methods: Adult inpatients with confirmed or suspected COVID-19 and a recent CT were recruited from April to July 2020. Twelve lung zones were scanned with a handheld POCUS machine. Images were reviewed independently by blinded experts and scored according to the proposed protocol. Patients were divided into low, intermediate, and high suspicion based on their POCUS score. Results: Of 79 subjects, 26.6% had a positive NAT and 31.6% had a typical CT pattern. The receiver operator curve for POCUS had an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.787 for positive NAT and 0.820 for a typical CT. Using a two-point cutoff system, POCUS had a sensitivity of 0.90 and 1.00 compared to NAT and typical CT pattern, respectively, at the lower cutoff; it had a specificity of 0.90 and 0.89 compared to NAT and typical CT pattern at the higher cutoff, respectively. Conclusions: The proposed lung POCUS protocol with a handheld device showed reasonable diagnostic performance to detect inpatients with a positive NAT or typical CT pattern for COVID-19. Particularly in low-resource settings, POCUS with handheld devices may serve as a helpful adjunct for persons under investigation for COVID-19 pneumonia.

A patient presented to the emergency department with altered mental status and lower extremity weakness in the setting of nitrous oxide inhalant abuse and Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) infection. He subsequently developed hypotension and severe hypoxia, found to have a saddle pulmonary embolus (PE) with right heart strain requiring alteplase (tPA).

Introduction: First detected in December 2019, the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemic upended the global community in a few short months. Diagnostic testing is currently limited in availability, accuracy, and efficiency. Imaging modalities such as chest radiograph (CXR), computed tomography, and lung ultrasound each demonstrate characteristic findings of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Lung ultrasound offers benefits over other imaging modalities including portability, cost, reduced exposure of healthcare workers as well as decreased contamination of equipment such as computed tomography scanners.Case Series: Here we present a case series describing consistent lung ultrasound findings in patients with confirmed COVID-19 despite variable clinical presentations and CXR findings. We discuss a triage algorithm for clinical applicability and utility of lung point-of-care ultrasound in the setting of COVID-19 and advocate for judicious and targeted use of this tool.Conclusion: Lung point-of-care ultrasound can provide valuable data supporting diagnostic and triage decisions surrounding suspected cases of COVID-19. Prospective studies validating our proposed triage algorithm are warranted.

Introduction: Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is an essential tool in the timely evaluation of an undifferentiated patient in the emergency department (ED). Our primary objective in this study was to determine the perceived impact of POCUS in high-risk cases presented at emergency medicine (EM) morbidity and mortality (M&M) conferences. Additionally, we sought to identify in which types of patients POCUS might be most useful, and which POCUS applications were considered to be highest yield.Methods: This was a retrospective survey of cases submitted to M&M at an EM residency program that spans two academic EDs, over one academic year. Postgraduate year 4 (PGY) residents who presented M&M cases at departmental sessions were surveyed on perceived impacts of POCUS on individual patient outcomes. We evaluated POCUS use and indications while the POCUS was used.Results: Over the 12-month period, we reviewed 667 cases from 18 M&M sessions by 15 PGY-4 residents and a supervising EM attending physician who chairs the M&M committee. Of these cases, 75 were selected by the M&M committee for review and presentation. POCUS was used in 27% (20/75) of the cases and not used in 73% (55/75). In cases where POCUS was not used, retrospective review determined that if POCUS had been used it would have “likely prevented the M&M” in 45% (25/55). Of these 25 cases, the majority of POCUS applications that could have helped were cardiac (32%, 8/25) and lung (32%, 8/25) ultrasound. POCUS was felt to have greatest potential in identifying missed diagnoses (92%, 23/25), and decreasing the time to diagnosis (92%, 23/25). Patients with cardiopulmonary chief complaints and abnormal vital signs were most likely to benefit. There were seven cases (35%, 7/20, 95% CI 15-59%) in which POCUS was performed and thought to have possibly adversely affected the outcome of the M&M.Conclusion: POCUS was felt to have the potential to reduce or prevent M&M in 45% of cases in which it was not used. Cardiac and lung POCUS were among the most useful applications, especially in patients with cardiopulmonary complaints and in those with abnormal vital signs.

A healthy 18-year-old male presented to the emergency department with chest pain, palpitations, and dyspnea. His exam was unremarkable; however, point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) revealed right ventricular strain with a D-sign and enlarged right ventricle. He subsequently reported a history of factor V Leiden. His D-dimer was markedly elevated, and a computed tomography angiogram of the chest demonstrated submassive pulmonary embolism (PE). He was taken to the catheterization lab for directed thrombolysis and was discharged in good condition two days later. Factor V Leiden is the most common genetic cause of venous thromboembolism. POCUS can facilitate rapid diagnosis and risk stratification of patients with acute PE.

Abstract Point‐of‐care ultrasound (POCUS) equipment management is critical in optimizing daily clinical operations in emergency departments (EDs). Traditional consultative ultrasound laboratories are well practiced at operations management, but this is not the case for POCUS programs, because machine upgrade and replacement metrics have not been developed or tested. We present a data‐driven method for assessment of POCUS equipment maintenance and replacement named the ULTrA (a data‐driven approach to point‐of‐care ultrasound upgrade) score. This novel model of assessing each ultrasound machine by quantitative scoring in each of four mostly objective categories: use (U), likeability (L), trustworthiness (Tr), and age (A). We propose the ULTrA model as a method to identify underperforming devices which could be upgraded or eliminated, and to compare relative performance amongst a group of departmental ultrasound machines. This composite score may be a useful objective tool that could replace individual proxies for clinical effectiveness, such as age, use, or individual provider preference. Additional research in multiple centers would be needed to refine and validate the ULTrA score. Once fully developed, the ULTrA score could be deployed in EDs and other clinical settings where POCUS is used to help streamline resources to maintain a functional and state‐of‐the‐art fleet of ultrasound machines over time.

Abstract Background Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is increasingly used in internal medicine, but a lack of trained faculty continues to limit the spread of POCUS education. Using a framework based on organizational change theories, this study sought to identify barriers and enablers for hospital-based practicing internists to learn and use POCUS in clinical practice. Methods We invited practicing internists at six North American institutions to participate in an electronic survey on their opinions regarding 39 barriers and enablers. Results Of the 342 participants invited, 170 participated (response rate 49.3%). The top barriers were lack of training (79%), lack of handheld ultrasound devices (78%), lack of direct supervision (65%), lack of time to perform POCUS during rounds (65%), and lack of quality assurance processes (53%). The majority of participants (55%) disagreed or strongly disagreed with the statement “My institution provides funding for POCUS training.” In general, participants’ attitudes towards POCUS were favourable, and future career opportunities and the potential for billing were not considered significant factors by our participants in the decision to learn or use POCUS. Conclusions This survey confirms the perceived importance of POCUS to practicing internists. To assist in closing faculty development gap, interventions should address training, supervision, quality assurance processes, availability of handheld devices, as well as dedicated time to perform POCUS during clinical care.

Abstract Competency in the application of point‐of‐care ultrasound (POCUS) has come to be an expected fundamental skill set for advanced practice providers (APPs) in the emergency department. Both American College of Emergency Physicians and the Society of Emergency Medicine Physician Assistants approve of and endorse POCUS use by APPs. However, clinical exposure to and practice of ultrasound in this setting is often variable and without structure. POCUS training must be evolved into a system where developed skills are compatible with clinical need and expectations of APPs. At our institution, we developed a formal, structured POCUS training program for emergency medicine (EM) APPs (including physician assistants and nurse practitioners) and evaluated its efficacy quantitatively by means of a proficiency index. This report examines the EM POCUS training most common to physician assistants and nurse practitioners before practicing at our institution and explores the components of our POCUS training program that have affected program development.

Abstract Background Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is an important clinical tool for a growing number of medical specialties. The current American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) Ultrasound Guidelines recommend that trainees perform 150–300 ultrasound scans as part of POCUS training. We sought to assess the relationship between ultrasound scan numbers and performance on an ultrasound-focused observed structured clinical examination (OSCE). Methods This was a cross-sectional cohort study in which the number of ultrasound scans residents had previously performed were obtained from a prospective database and compared with their total score on an ultrasound OSCE. Ultrasound fellowship trained emergency physicians administered a previously published OSCE that consisted of standardized questions testing image acquisition and interpretation, ultrasound machine mechanics, patient positioning, and troubleshooting. Residents were observed while performing core applications including aorta, biliary, cardiac, deep vein thrombosis, Focused Assessment with Sonography in Trauma (FAST), pelvic, and thoracic ultrasound imaging. Results Twenty-nine postgraduate year (PGY)-3 and PGY-4 emergency medicine (EM) residents participated in the OSCE. The median OSCE score was 354 [interquartile range (IQR) 343–361] out of a total possible score of 370. Trainees had previously performed a median of 341 [IQR 289–409] total scans. Residents with more than 300 ultrasound scans had a median OSCE score of 355 [IQR 351–360], which was slightly higher than the median OSCE score of 342 [IQR 326–361] in the group with less than 300 total scans (p = 0.04). Overall, a LOWESS curve demonstrated a positive association between scan numbers and OSCE scores with graphical review of the data suggesting a plateau effect. Conclusion The results of this small single residency program study suggest a pattern of improvement in OSCE performance as scan numbers increased, with the appearance of a plateau effect around 300 scans. Further investigation of this correlation in diverse practice environments and within individual ultrasound modalities will be necessary to create generalizable recommendations for scan requirements as part of overall POCUS proficiency assessment.

Introduction: Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is an essential tool in the timely evaluation of an undifferentiated patient in the emergency department (ED). Our primary objective in this study was to determine the perceived impact of POCUS in high-risk cases presented at emergency medicine (EM) morbidity and mortality (M&M) conferences. Additionally, we sought to identify in which types of patients POCUS might be most useful, and which POCUS applications were considered to be highest yield. Methods: This was a retrospective survey of cases submitted to M&M at an EM residency program that spans two academic EDs, over one academic year. Postgraduate year 4 (PGY) residents who presented M&M cases at departmental sessions were surveyed on perceived impacts of POCUS on individual patient outcomes. We evaluated POCUS use and indications while the POCUS was used. Results: Over the 12-month period, we reviewed 667 cases from 18 M&M sessions by 15 PGY-4 residents and a supervising EM attending physician who chairs the M&M committee. Of these cases, 75 were selected by the M&M committee for review and presentation. POCUS was used in 27% (20/75) of the cases and not used in 73% (55/75). In cases where POCUS was not used, retrospective review determined that if POCUS had been used it would have “likely prevented the M&M” in 45% (25/55). Of these 25 cases, the majority of POCUS applications that could have helped were cardiac (32%, 8/25) and lung (32%, 8/25) ultrasound. POCUS was felt to have greatest potential in identifying missed diagnoses (92%, 23/25), and decreasing the time to diagnosis (92%, 23/25). Patients with cardiopulmonary chief complaints and abnormal vital signs were most likely to benefit. There were seven cases (35%, 7/20, 95% CI 15–59%) in which POCUS was performed and thought to have possibly adversely affected the outcome of the M&M. Conclusion: POCUS was felt to have the potential to reduce or prevent M&M in 45% of cases in which it was not used. Cardiac and lung POCUS were among the most useful applications, especially in patients with cardiopulmonary complaints and in those with abnormal vital signs.

Introduction: First detected in December 2019, the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemic upended the global community in a few short months. Diagnostic testing is currently limited in availability, accuracy, and efficiency. Imaging modalities such as chest radiograph (CXR), computed tomography, and lung ultrasound each demonstrate characteristic findings of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Lung ultrasound offers benefits over other imaging modalities including portability, cost, reduced exposure of healthcare workers as well as decreased contamination of equipment such as computed tomography scanners. Case Series: Here we present a case series describing consistent lung ultrasound findings in patients with confirmed COVID-19 despite variable clinical presentations and CXR findings. We discuss a triage algorithm for clinical applicability and utility of lung point-of-care ultrasound in the setting of COVID-19 and advocate for judicious and targeted use of this tool. Conclusion: Lung point-of-care ultrasound can provide valuable data supporting diagnostic and triage decisions surrounding suspected cases of COVID-19. Prospective studies validating our proposed triage algorithm are warranted.

Abstract Background Non-invasive measures that can accurately estimate cardiac output may help identify volume-responsive patients. This study seeks to compare two non-invasive measures (corrected carotid flow time and carotid blood flow) and their correlations with invasive reference measurements of cardiac output. Consenting adult patients (n = 51) at Massachusetts General Hospital cardiac catheterization laboratory undergoing right heart catheterization between February and April 2016 were included. Carotid ultrasound images were obtained concurrently with cardiac output measurements, obtained by the thermodilution method in the absence of severe tricuspid regurgitation and by the Fick oxygen method otherwise. Corrected carotid flow time was calculated as systole time/√cycle time. Carotid blood flow was calculated as π × (carotid diameter)2/4 × velocity time integral × heart rate. Measurements were obtained using a single carotid waveform and an average of three carotid waveforms for both measures. Results Single waveform measurements of corrected flow time did not correlate with cardiac output (ρ = 0.25, 95% CI −0.03 to 0.49, p = 0.08), but an average of three waveforms correlated significantly, although weakly (ρ = 0.29, 95% CI 0.02–0.53, p = 0.046). Carotid blood flow measurements correlated moderately with cardiac output regardless of if single waveform or an average of three waveforms were used: ρ = 0.44, 95% CI 0.18–0.63, p = 0.004, and ρ = 0.41, 95% CI 0.16–0.62, p = 0.004, respectively. Conclusions Carotid blood flow may be a better marker of cardiac output and less subject to measurements issues than corrected carotid flow time.

A healthy 18-year-old male presented to the emergency department with chest pain, palpitations, and dyspnea. His exam was unremarkable; however, point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) revealed right ventricular strain with a D-sign and enlarged right ventricle. He subsequently reported a history of factor V Leiden. His D-dimer was markedly elevated, and a computed tomography angiogram of the chest demonstrated submassive pulmonary embolism (PE). He was taken to the catheterization lab for directed thrombolysis and was discharged in good condition two days later. Factor V Leiden is the most common genetic cause of venous thromboembolism. POCUS can facilitate rapid diagnosis and risk stratification of patients with acute PE.

The article presents a case report on the use of deoxycholic acid (DCA) to treat Dercum disease, a rare condition characterized by multiple painful fatty tumors. The study was conducted by Ms. Silence, Dr. Kourosh, Ms. Rice, and Ms. Gao from the Department of Dermatology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, published in the journal "Cutis" .The authors found that DCA was effective in reducing the size of the tumors and improving pain in the patients studied.

Background: Point‐of‐care ultrasound (US) has been suggested as the primary imaging in evaluating patients with suspected diverticulitis. Discrimination between simple and complicated diverticulitis may help to expedite emergent surgical consults and determine the risk of complications. This study aimed to: (1) determine the accuracy of an US protocol (TICS) for diagnosing diverticulitis in the emergency department (ED) setting and (2) assess the ability of TICS to distinguish between simple and complicated diverticulitis. Methods: Patients with clinically suspected diverticulitis who underwent a diagnostic computed tomography (CT) scan were identified prospectively in the ED. Emergency US faculty and fellows blinded to the CT results performed and interpreted US scans. The presence of simple or complicated diverticulitis was recorded after each US evaluation. The diagnostic ability of the US was compared to CT as the criterion standard. Modified Hinchey classification was used to distinguish between simple and complicated diverticulitis. Results: A total of 149 patients (55% female, mean ± SD age 58 ± 16 years) were enrolled and included in the final analyses. Diverticulitis was the final diagnosis in 75 of 149 patients (50.3%), of whom 53 had simple diverticulitis and 22 had perforated diverticulitis (29.4%). TICS protocol's test characteristics for simple diverticulitis include a sensitivity of 95% (95% confidence interval [CI] 87%–99%), specificity of 76% (95% CI 65%–86%), positive predictive value of 80% (95% CI 71%–88%), and negative predictive value of 93% (95% CI 84%–98%). TICS protocol correctly identified 12 of 22 patients with complicated diverticulitis (sensitivity 55% [95% CI 32%–76%]) and specificity was 96% (95% CI 91%–99%). Eight of 10 missed diagnoses of complicated diverticulitis were identified as simple diverticulitis, and two were recorded as negative. Conclusions: In ED patients with suspected diverticulitis, US demonstrated high accuracy in ruling out or diagnosing diverticulitis, but its reliability in differentiating complicated from simple diverticulitis is unsatisfactory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]