A Description of the Prehospital Phase of Aortic Dissection in Terms of Early Suspicion and Treatment

Significant room for improvement in the prehospital assessment and treatment of acute abdominal pain: a retrospective observational study

BACKGROUND

Acute abdominal pain (AAP) is a common reason for calling emergency medical services (EMS). Despite the widely acknowledged importance of effective prehospital pain management, described by patients as crucial regardless of any other factor, studies on prehospital pain management in AAP patients are limited and suggest room for improvement. This is particularly relevant given the long-standing controversy surrounding the use of analgesia in AAP patients before a final diagnosis is made, which may still influence the prehospital pain management.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of pain management in EMS patients with AAP in a central Swedish region. The region had a population density of 15.7 inhabitants per square kilometer spread over a mix of small urban and rural settings. Patient records were manually reviewed and scanned for written assessments or numeric ratings of pain. The analysis focused on proportions of assessment, treatment and reassessment of pain as well as median pain intensity, pain reduction and proportion of patients with a low last recording of pain.

RESULTS

816 patients were included. Pain was assessed in 55% (n = 447) of all cases. The median initial pain intensity was eight units (IQR 6.0-9.0) on the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS), and 90% (n = 403) of the assessed patients experienced moderate or severe pain. Of those, 62% (n = 249) received pharmacological treatment. In 50% (n = 158) of all cases receiving treatment, pain was reassessed afterwards. The median pain reduction was four units (IQR 2.0-5.0) on the NRS scale. Among all cases, 10% (n = 84) had a last recorded pain assessment indicating low pain.

CONCLUSIONS

Significant room for improvement in the prehospital management of acute abdominal pain was found. The proportions of pain assessment, treatment and reassessment were low with nine out of ten patients leaving prehospital care with unknown, moderate or severe pain. Among the cases where pain assessment, treatment and reassessment were made and recorded, four out of five patients experienced significant pain relief, indicating the potential of better prehospital pain management.

Treatment and referral experiences of patients with type A aortic dissection and their families: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to analyse the experiences and feelings of patients with type A aortic dissection (TAAD) and their families during the medical treatment and referral process, investigate the entire process's needs and problems and provide evidence for improving the aortic dissection treatment system.

DESIGN

A qualitative descriptive design using a phenomenological study. Face-to-face semistructured interviews were conducted. Thematic analysis was used to analyse the interview data, which was transcribed verbatim.

SETTING

Department of Cardiovascular Surgery of Shanxi Bethune Hospital in China.

PARTICIPANTS

Fifteen family groups, consisting of patients with TAAD who underwent surgical treatment and their families, were selected.

RESULTS

Three primary themes were discussed and developed. Theme 1: the experiences of medical treatment and referral (confusion at the onset; complex inner feelings and emotional expressions of the medical treatment and referral; preoperative inner conflict); theme 2: problems with the TAAD medical treatment system (the quality of diagnosis and medical treatment needs to be improved; deficiency of medical system policies and procedures); and theme 3: real demands (demands for TAAD-related knowledge and access to the disease; economic-related demands).

CONCLUSION

Patients with TAAD and their families encounter complex inner experiences, multiple requirements and numerous challenges during the medical treatment and referral process. It is advised that the treatment and referral system of TAAD in China needs to be improved. Future research and clinical practice should standardise diagnosis and treatment training, establish a fast channel for TAAD to prioritise treatment, popularise aortic dissection-related knowledge and improve the funding system.

Time is of the essence: where can we improve care in acute aortic dissection?

OBJECTIVES

In acute aortic dissection type A various components of the diagnostic and logistic pathways may affect the time to definitive treatment. This study aimed to characterize these components and to identify factors delaying the optimal management within our institutional referral network.

METHODS

Between January 2017 and January 2020, 96 consecutive patients with classical aortic dissection type A were admitted (28%) or referred (72%) to our tertiary care centre and analysed retrospectively. Data are presented as medians (25th-75th quartile).

RESULTS

Median age was 66 years (56-74), 63% were male. Most of the patients were primarily admitted to a cardiology department (40%), whereas about a fourth were admitted to departments for internal medicine (26%) and general surgery (27%). The median interval from the onset of symptoms to hospital admission was 2.1 (1-4.4) h. From admission to confirmed diagnosis it took 2.1 (0.6-9.5) h and the median interval from confirmed diagnosis to admission at our specialized tertiary care aortic centre was 1.5 (0.9-2.4) h. Following admission to our centre, 1.1 (0.5-1.9) h passed until the induction of anaesthesia and 0.8 (0.0-1.1) h until the start of surgery. The total interval from the onset of symptoms to the start of surgery was 7.6 h (5.1-12.3).

CONCLUSIONS

The marked variability of the time from symptoms to diagnosis at any medical facility demonstrates the importance of awareness in the optimization of the treatment of acute aortic dissection type A.

Ruptured Aortic Aneurysm and Dissection Related Death: an Autopsy Database Analysis

Acute aortic catastrophes (AAC), mainly ruptured aneurysms and dissections, lead all other vascular conditions in morbidity and mortality, even if intervention occurs. The aim of our study was to give a descriptive overview of the demographic and pathological characteristics of AAC. Between 1994 and 2013, 80,469 autopsies were performed at Semmelweis University hospitals in Budapest. After collecting the autopsy reports we were able to create the AAC database upon which we conducted our analysis. We found 567 cases of AAC. The cause of death in 120 of them was classified as a non-ruptured aorta with malperfusion or distal embolization. Of the remaining 447 cases, in 305 the cause of death was a ruptured aortic aneurysm (rAA), and in 142 it was a ruptured aortic dissection (rAD). The distribution of rAA cases was 34.4% thoracal, 4.3% thoracoabdominal, and 61.3% abdominal. We found female dominance where the rAA was thoracal. In rAD cases, 84% were Stanford A and 16% Stanford B type. In both groups we found different pathological distributions. In the prehospital group, the number of thoracal ruptures was considerable. 88% of the patients with Stanford A dissection died in the prehospital or perioperative period. The most progressive AACs were ruptures of intrapericardial aneurysms and Stanford A dissections., however survival rate can be elevated by using rapid imaging examination and immediate surgical intervention. We want to highlight that our study contains such gender differences, which are worth to be taken into consideration.

A Description of the Prehospital Phase of Aortic Dissection in Terms of Early Suspicion and Treatment

Purpose

Aortic dissection is difficult to detect in the early phase due to a variety of symptoms. This report describes the prehospital setting of aortic dissection in terms of symptoms, treatment, and suspicion by the Emergency Medical Service (EMS) staff.

Basic Procedures

All patients in the Municipality of Gothenburg, Sweden, who, in 2010 and 2011, had a hospital discharge diagnosis of aortic dissection (international classification of disease (ICD) I 71,0) were included. The exclusion criteria were: age < 18 years of age and having a planned operation. This was a retrospective, descriptive study based on patient records. In the statistical analyses, Fisher's exact test and the Mann-Whitney U test were used for analyses of dichotomous and continuous/ordered variables.

Main findings

Of 92 patients, 78% were transported to the hospital by the EMS. The most common symptom was pain (94%). Pain was intensive or very intensive in 89% of patients, with no significant difference in relation to the use of the EMS. Only 47% of those using the EMS were given pain relief with narcotic analgesics. Only 12% were free from pain on admission to the hospital. A suspicion of aortic dissection was reported by the EMS staff in only 17% of cases. The most common preliminary diagnosis at the dispatch center (31%) and by EMS clinicians (52%) was chest pain or angina pectoris. In all, 79% of patients were discharged alive from the hospital (75% of those that used the EMS and 95% of those that did not).

Conclusion

Among patients who were hospitalized due to aortic dissection in Gothenburg, 78% used the EMS. Despite severe pain in the majority of patients, fewer than half received narcotic analgesics, and only 12% were free from pain on admission to the hospital. In fewer than one-in-five patients was a suspicion of aortic dissection reported by the EMS staff.

AxelssonC, KarlssonT, PandeK, WigertzK, ÖrtenwallP, NordanstigJ, HerlitzJ. A description of the prehospital phase of aortic dissection in terms of early suspicion and treatment. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2015;30(2):1-8.