POCUS literature primer: key papers on POCUS in cardiac arrest and shock

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study is to identify the top five most influential papers published on the use of point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) in cardiac arrest and the top five most influential papers on the use of POCUS in shock in adult patients.

METHODS

An expert panel of 14 members was recruited from the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians (CAEP) Emergency Ultrasound Committee and the Canadian Ultrasound Fellowship Collaborative. The members of the panel are ultrasound fellowship trained or equivalent, are engaged in POCUS research, and are leaders in POCUS locally and nationally in Canada. A modified Delphi process was used, consisting of three rounds of sequential surveys and discussion to achieve consensus on the top five most influential papers for the use of POCUS in cardiac arrest and shock.

RESULTS

The panel identified 39 relevant papers on POCUS in cardiac arrest and 42 relevant papers on POCUS in shock. All panel members participated in all three rounds of the modified Delphi process, and we ultimately identified the top five most influential papers on POCUS in cardiac arrest and also on POCUS in shock. Studies include descriptions and analysis of safe POCUS protocols that add value from a diagnostic and prognostic perspective in both populations during resuscitation.

CONCLUSION

We have developed a reading list of the top five influential papers on the use of POCUS in cardiac arrest and shock to better inform residents, fellows, clinicians, and researchers on integrating and studying POCUS in a more evidence-based manner.

Point-of-Care Ultrasound (POCUS) Literature Primer: Key Papers on Renal and Biliary POCUS

Objective The objective of this study is to identify the top five influential papers published on renal point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) and the top five influential papers on biliary POCUS in adult patients. Methods A 14-member expert panel was recruited from the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians (CAEP) Emergency Ultrasound Committee and the Canadian Ultrasound Fellowship Collaborative. All panel members have had ultrasound fellowship training or equivalent, are actively engaged in POCUS scholarship, and are involved with POCUS at their local site and nationally in Canada. We used a modified Delphi process consisting of three rounds of sequential surveys and discussion to achieve consensus on the top five influential papers for renal POCUS and biliary POCUS. Results The panel identified 27 relevant papers on renal POCUS and 30 relevant papers on biliary POCUS. All panel members participated in all three rounds of the modified Delphi process, and after completing this process, we identified the five most influential papers on renal POCUS and the five most influential papers on biliary POCUS. Conclusion We have developed a list, based on expert opinion, of the top five influential papers on renal and biliary POCUS to better inform all trainees and clinicians on how to use these applications in a more evidence-based manner. This list will also be of interest to clinicians and researchers who strive to further advance the field of POCUS.

Point of Care Ultrasound Literature Primer: Key Papers on Focused Assessment With Sonography in Trauma (FAST) and Extended FAST

Objective

The objective of this study is to identify the top five most influential papers published on focused assessment with sonography in trauma (FAST) and the top five most influential papers on the extended FAST (E-FAST) in adult patients.

Methods

An expert panel was recruited from the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians (CAEP) Emergency Ultrasound Committee and the Canadian Ultrasound Fellowship Collaborative. These experts are ultrasound fellowship-trained or equivalent, are involved with point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) research and scholarship, and are leaders in both the POCUS program at their local site and within the national Canadian POCUS community. This 14-member expert group used a modified Delphi process consisting of three rounds of sequential surveys and discussion to achieve consensus on the top five most influential papers for FAST and E-FAST.

Results

The expert panel identified 56 relevant papers on FAST and 40 relevant papers on E-FAST. After completing all three rounds of the modified Delphi process, the authors identified the top five most influential papers on FAST and the top five most influential papers on E-FAST.

Conclusion

We have developed a reading list of the top five influential papers for FAST and E-FAST that will benefit residents, fellows, and clinicians who are interested in using POCUS in an evidence-informed manner.

Is point-of-care ultrasound a reliable predictor of outcome during traumatic cardiac arrest? A systematic review and meta-analysis from the SHoC investigators

AIM

Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) has been shown to assist in predicting outcomes in cardiac arrest. We evaluated the test characteristics of POCUS in predicting poor outcomes: failure of return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), survival to hospital admission (SHA), survival to hospital discharge (SHD) and neurologically intact survival to hospital discharge (NISHD) in adult and paediatric patients with blunt and penetrating traumatic cardiac arrest (TCA) in out-of-hospital or emergency department settings.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis using the PRISMA guidelines. We searched Clinicaltrials.gov, CINAHL, Cochrane library, EMBASE, Medline and the World Health Organization-International Clinical Trials Registry from 1974 to November 9, 2020. Risk of bias was assessed using QUADAS-2 tool. We used a random-effects meta-analysis model with 95% confidence intervals with I² statistics for heterogeneity.

RESULTS

We included 8 studies involving 710 cases of TCA. For all blunt and penetrating TCA patients who failed to achieve ROSC, the specificity (proportion of patients with cardiac activity on POCUS who achieved ROSC) was 98% (95% CI 0.13 to 1.0). The sensitivity (proportion of patients with cardiac standstill on POCUS who failed to achieve ROSC) was 91% (95% CI 0.67 to 0.98). No patient with cardiac standstill survived. Substantial level of heterogeneity was noted.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients in TCA without cardiac activity on POCUS have a high likelihood of death and negligible chance of SHD. The numbers of patients included in published studies remains too low for practice recommendations for termination of resuscitation based solely upon the absence of cardiac activity on POCUS.