Bedside POCUS during ward emergencies is associated with improved diagnosis and outcome: an observational, prospective, controlled study

Background

Rapid response teams are intended to improve early diagnosis and intervention in ward patients who develop acute respiratory or circulatory failure. A management protocol including the use of a handheld ultrasound device for immediate point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) examination at the bedside may improve team performance. The main objective of the study was to assess the impact of implementing such a POCUS-guided management on the proportion of adequate immediate diagnoses in two groups. Secondary endpoints included time to treatment and patient outcomes.

Methods

A prospective, observational, controlled study was conducted in a single university hospital. Two teams alternated every other day for managing in-hospital ward patients developing acute respiratory and/or circulatory failures. Only one of the team used an ultrasound device (POCUS group).

Results

We included 165 patients (POCUS group 83, control group 82). Proportion of adequate immediate diagnoses was 94% in the POCUS group and 80% in the control group (p = 0.009). Time to first treatment/intervention was shorter in the POCUS group (15 [10–25] min vs. 34 [15–40] min, p < 0.001). In-hospital mortality rates were 17% in the POCUS group and 35% in the control group (p = 0.007), but this difference was not confirmed in the propensity score sample (29% vs. 34%, p = 0.53).

Conclusion

Our study suggests that protocolized use of a handheld POCUS device at the bedside in the ward may improve the proportion of adequate diagnosis, the time to initial treatment and perhaps also survival of ward patients developing acute respiratory or circulatory failure.

Clinical Trial Registration NCT02967809. Registered 18 November 2016, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02967809.

Hemodynamics in Shock Patients Assessed by Critical Care Ultrasound and Its Relationship to Outcome: A Prospective Study

BACKGROUND

Shock is one of the causes of mortality in the intensive care unit (ICU). Traditionally, hemodynamics related to shock have been monitored by broad-spectrum devices with treatment guided by many inaccurate variables to describe the pathophysiological changes. Critical care ultrasound (CCUS) has been widely advocated as a preferred tool to monitor shock patients. The purpose of this study was to analyze and broaden current knowledge of the characteristics of ultrasonic hemodynamic pattern and investigate their relationship to outcome.

METHODS

This prospective study of shock patients in CCUS was conducted in 181 adult patients between April 2016 and June 2017 in the Department of Intensive Care Unit of West China Hospital. CCUS was performed within the initial 6 hours after shock patients were enrolled. The demographic and clinical characteristics, ultrasonic pattern of hemodynamics, and outcome were recorded. A stepwise bivariate logistic regression model was established to identify the correlation between ultrasonic variables and the 28-day mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 181 patients with shock were included in our study (male/female: 113/68). The mean age was 58.2 ± 18.0 years; the mean Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II score) was 23.7 ± 8.7, and the 28-day mortality was 44.8% (81/181). The details of ultrasonic pattern were well represented, and the multivariate analysis revealed that mitral annular plane systolic excursion (MAPSE), mitral annular peak systolic velocity (S'-MV), tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (TAPSE), and lung ultrasound score (LUSS) were the independent risk factors for 28-day mortality in our study, as well as APACHE II score, PaO2/FiO2, and lactate (p = 0.047, 0.041, 0.022, 0.002, 0.027, 0.028, and 0.01, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

CCUS exam on admission provided valuable information to describe the pathophysiological changes of shock patients and the mechanism of shock. Several critical variables obtained by CCUS were related to outcome, hence deserving more attention in clinical decision-making. Trial Registration. The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of West China Hospital Review Board for human research with the following reference number 201736 and was registered on ClinicalTrials. This trial is registered with NCT03082326 on 3 March 2017 (retrospectively registered).

The diagnostic accuracy of a point-of-care ultrasound protocol for shock etiology: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of a point-of-care ultrasound exam for undifferentiated shock in patients presenting to the emergency department.

METHODS

Ovid MEDLINE, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and research meeting abstracts were searched from 1966 to June 2018 for relevant studies. QUADAS-2 was used to assess study quality, and meta-analysis was conducted to pool performance data of individual categories of shock.

RESULTS

A total of 5,097 non-duplicated studies were identified, of which 58 underwent full-text review; 4 were included for analysis. Study quality by QUADAS-2 was considered overall a low risk of bias. Pooled positive likelihood ratio values ranged from 8.25 (95% CI 3.29 to 20.69) for hypovolemic shock to 40.54 (95% CI 12.06 to 136.28) for obstructive shock. Pooled negative likelihood ratio values ranged from 0.13 (95% CI 0.04 to 0.48) for obstructive shock to 0.32 (95% CI 0.16 to 0.62) for mixed-etiology shock.

CONCLUSION

The rapid ultrasound for shock and hypotension (RUSH) exam performs better when used to rule in causes of shock, rather than to definitively exclude specific etiologies. The negative likelihood ratios of the exam by subtype suggest that it most accurately rules out obstructive shock.

The PIEPEAR Workflow: A Critical Care Ultrasound Based 7-Step Approach as a Standard Procedure to Manage Patients with Acute Cardiorespiratory Compromise, with Two Example Cases Presented

Critical care ultrasound (CCUS) has been widely used as a useful tool to assist clinical judgement. The utilization should be integrated into clinical scenario and interact with other tests. No publication has reported this. We present a CCUS based "7-step approach" workflow-the PIEPEAR Workflow-which we had summarized and integrated our experience in CCUS and clinical practice into, and then we present two cases which we have applied the workflow into as examples. Step one is "problems emerged?" classifying the signs of the deterioration into two aspects: acute circulatory compromise and acute respiratory compromise. Step two is "information clear?" quickly summarizing the patient's medical history by three aspects. Step three is "focused exam launched": (1) focused exam of the heart by five views: the assessment includes (1) fast and global assessment of the heart (heart glance) to identify cases that need immediate life-saving intervention and (2) assessing the inferior vena cava, right heart, diastolic and systolic function of left heart, and systematic vascular resistance to clarify the hemodynamics. (2) Lung ultrasound exam is performed to clarify the predominant pattern of the lung. Step four is "pathophysiologic changes reported." The results of the focused ultrasound exam were integrated to conclude the pathophysiologic changes. Step five is "etiology explored" diagnosing the etiology by integrating Step two and Step four and searching for the source of infection, according to the clues extracted from the focused ultrasound exam; additional ultrasound exams or other tests should be applied if needed. Step six is "action" supporting the circulation and respiration sticking to Step four. Treat the etiologies according step five. Step seven is "recheck to adjust." Repeat focused ultrasound and other tests to assess the response to treatment, adjust the treatment if needed, and confirm or correct the final diagnosis. With two cases as examples presented, we insist that applying CCUS with 7-step approach workflow is easy to follow and has theoretical advantages. The coming research on its value is expected.

Blunt chest trauma: a clinical chameleon

The incidence of blunt chest trauma (BCT) is greater than 15% of all trauma admissions to the emergency departments worldwide and is the second leading cause of death after head injury in motor vehicle accidents. The mortality due to BCT is inhomogeneously described ranging from 9% to 60%. BCT is commonly caused by a sudden high-speed deceleration trauma to the anterior chest, leading to a compression of the thorax. All thoracic structures might be injured as a result of the trauma. Complex cardiac arrhythmia, heart murmurs, hypotension, angina-like chest pain, respiratory insufficiency or distention of the jugular veins may indicate potential cardiac injury. However, on admission to emergency departments symptoms might be missing or may not be clearly associated with the injury. Accurate diagnostics and early management in order to prevent serious complications and death are essential for patients suffering a BCT. Optimal initial diagnostics includes echocardiography or CT, Holter-monitor recordings, serial 12-lead electrocardiography and measurements of cardiac enzymes. Immediate diagnostics leading to the appropriate therapy is essential for saving a patient’s life. The key aspect of the entire management, including diagnostics and treatment of patients with BCT, remains an interdisciplinary team involving cardiologists, cardiothoracic surgeons, imaging radiologists and trauma specialists working in tandem.

Make it SIMPLE: enhanced shock management by focused cardiac ultrasound

BACKGROUND

Shock is a spectrum of circulatory failure that, if not properly managed, would lead to high mortality. Special diagnostic and treatment strategies are essential to save lives. However, clinical and laboratory findings are always non-specific, resulting in clinical dilemmas.

MAIN CONTENT

Focused cardiac ultrasound (FoCUS) has emerged as one of the power tools for clinicians to answer simple clinical questions and guide subsequent management in hypotensive patients. This article will review the development and utility of FoCUS in different types of shock. The sonographic features and ultrasound enhanced management of hypotensive patients by a de novo "SIMPLE" approach will be described. Current evidence on FoCUS will also be reviewed.

CONCLUSION

Focused cardiac ultrasound provides timely and valuable information for the evaluation of shock. It helps to improve the diagnostic accuracy, narrow the possible differential diagnoses, and guide specific management. SIMPLE is an easy-to-remember mnemonic for non-cardiologists or novice clinical sonographers to apply FoCUS and interpret the specific sonographic findings when evaluating patients in shock.

The diagnosis of right heart thrombus by focused cardiac ultrasound in a critically ill patient in compensated shock

Right heart thrombus (RHT) is a life-threatening diagnosis that is rarely made in the emergency department (ED), but with the increasing use of focused cardiac ultrasound (FocUS), more of these cases may be identified in a timely fashion. We present a case of an ill-appearing patient who had an immediate change in management due to the visualization of RHT soon after arrival to the ED. The diagnosis was confirmed after a cardiology-performed ultrasound (US). This case illustrates the value of the recognition of RHT on FocUS and how US protocols designed for the evaluation of shock and shortness of breath may potentially be expanded to patients in a 'compensated' or 'pre-shock' state to expedite the correct diagnosis and to facilitate more timely management.

Bedside ultrasound in resuscitation and the rapid ultrasound in shock protocol

Assessment of hemodynamic status in a shock state remains a challenging issue in Emergency Medicine and Critical Care. As the use of invasive hemodynamic monitoring declines, bedside-focused ultrasound has become a valuable tool in the evaluation and management of patients in shock. No longer a means to simply evaluate organ anatomy, ultrasound has expanded to become a rapid and noninvasive method for the assessment of patient physiology. Clinicians caring for critical patients should strongly consider integrating ultrasound into their resuscitation pathways.