Spontaneous Abortion

Medical Student Clinical Pearl

Miranda Lees, Clinical Clerk II

Dalhousie Medicine New Brunswick, Saint John

Reviewed by Dr. Mandy Peach

Case

A 21yo G3P1A1 female at 6 weeks gestation presented to the Emergency Department with an 8 hour history of vaginal bleeding and abdominal pain. The bleeding is a mixture of bright red and brown blood with no clots, and the abdominal pain is episodic cramping in her suprapubic region.

Her obstetrical history is significant for 2 prior pregnancies, the first of which was carried to term with an uncomplicated vaginal delivery, and the second of which had resulted in a spontaneous abortion at 6 weeks gestation. She is otherwise healthy. The patient noted with both prior pregnancies she had similar vaginal bleeding around 6-8 weeks gestation. She was given RhoGAM due to her Rh- blood type.

On assessment the patient appeared well with all vital signs within normal limits. On physical exam bowel sounds were present, the abdomen was tympanic to percussion, and pain on palpation was present in the patient’s suprapubic region.

 

Differential for life threatening causes of vaginal bleeding in pregnancy

<20 weeks gestation >20 weeks gestation
      ruptured ectopic pregnancy          placental abruption
       retained products of conception          placenta previa
       complication of termination          post partum hemorrhage

Other causes for vaginal bleeding to consider in pregnancy and in non-pregnant patients

Spontaneous abortion
Acute heavy menstrual bleeding
Genitourinary trauma
Uterine arteriovenous malformation
Ruptured ovarian cyst
Ovarian torsion
Pelvic Inflammatory Disease
Fibroids
Polyps
Foreign body
Coagulation disorder
Medication related
Gynecologic malignancy

 

Investigations

A βhCG was ordered to confirm pregnancy and bedside ultrasound was done to look for intrauterine pregnancy.

Transabdominal ultrasound showed the following:

The presence of a gestational sac within the uterus and a fetal heartbeat within the fetal pole confirmed a viable intrauterine pregnancy (IUP). The patient was diagnosed with threatened abortion.

 

Spontaneous Abortion-an overview

Spontaneous abortion is one of the most common complications of pregnancy, occurring in 17-22% of pregnancies2 and is defined as loss of pregnancy prior to 20 weeks gestation, occurring most often in the first trimester3. There are 3 primary causes: chromosomal abnormalities in the fetus, maternal anatomic abnormalities, and trauma.3

Risk factors for spontaneous abortion

age (below 20 and above 35)
moderate to severe bleeding (especially if passage of clots)
prior pregnancy loss
maternal comorbidities (DM, autoimmune conditions, obesity, thyroid disease)
infection (notably parvovirus, CMV and untreated syphilis)
teratogenic medications
maternal radiation exposure
maternal smoking
caffeine
alcohol use

 

Classification4

Missed abortion is characterized by an asymptomatic death of the fetus with a lack of contractions to push out the products of conception.5

Clinical presentation

Spontaneous abortion most commonly presents with vaginal bleeding and cramping, ranging from mild to severe1. However, most women with first-trimester bleeding will not undergo spontaneous abortion1. Bleeding associated with spontaneous abortion often involves passage of clots or fetal tissue, and the cramping can be constant or intermittent, often worse with passage of tissue1.

Diagnosis

Confirmation of spontaneous abortion requires pelvic ultrasound.

In patients with a prior ultrasound showing intrauterine pregnancy, diagnosis of spontaneous abortion can be made if a subsequent ultrasound shows no intrauterine pregnancy or a loss of previously-seen fetal heartbeat1.

In patients with a prior ultrasound showing intrauterine pregnancy with no fetal heartbeat, spontaneous abortion is diagnosed based on the following1:

  • A gestational sac >25mm in diameter containing no yolk sac or embryo
  • An embryo with crown rump length >7mm with no fetal cardiac activity
  • After pelvic ultrasound showing a gestational sac without a yolk sac, absence of embryo with a heartbeat in >2 weeks
  • After pelvic ultrasound showing a gestational sac with a yolk sac, absence of embryo with a heartbeat in >11 days

Case conclusion

The patient was treated with IM RhoGAM, a formal pelvic and transvaginal ultrasound was arranged for the next day, and she was discharged home. The follow-up ultrasound showed a gestational sac present in the uterus, an embryo with crown rump length of 8.1mm and the presence of a fetal heartbeat.

 

References

  1. Borhart D. Approach to the adult with vaginal bleeding in the Emergency Department. In: UptoDate, Hockberger R (Ed), UpToDate, Waltham, MA. (Accessed on October 8, 2020).
  2. Gracia C, Sammel M, Chittams J, Hummel A, Shaunik A, et al. Risk Factors for Spontaneous Abortion in Early Symptomatic First-Trimester Pregnancies. Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2005;106(5):993-999. doi 1097/01.AOG.0000183604.09922.e0.
  3. Prager, Mikes & Dalton. Pregnancy loss (miscarriage): Risk factors, etiology, clinical manisfestations, and diagnostic evaluation. In: UptoDate, Eckler (Ed), UptoDate, Waltham MA. (accessed Nov 28, 2020)
  4. Diaz. 2018. Types of Spontaneous Abortion. In: GrepMed. Image Based Medical Reference. https://www.grepmed.com/images/5425/classification-spontaneous-obstetrics-diagnosis-abortion-obgyn-types (Accessed Nov 28, 2020)
  5. Alves C, Rapp A. Spontaneous Abortion (Miscarriage) [Updated 2020 Jul 20]. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2020 Jan-. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK560521/.

 

Continue Reading

Skin and Soft Tissue Infections: A PoCUS Guided Approach

Medical Student Clinical Pearl – November 2020

 

Robert Hanlon

@roberthanlon12

Year: 4
DMNB Class of 2021
 

Reviewed and Edited by Dr. David Lewis

All case histories are illustrative and not based on any individual

 


Case Report

A 25yr old male presents with a 3 day history of a red swollen foot following an insect bite. He has no past medical history. On examination there is some erythema and swelling on the dorsum of the left foot. Palpation is very tender.

You are aware of recommended guidelines that advise I&D for purulent infections and decide to proceed with the procedure. Despite trying to freeze the area with lidocaine, the procedure is still painful and no pus is drained. You point to the minimal serosanguinous exudate and sheepishly suggest to the patient that the I&D was successful and that a course of antibiotics will resolve this issue.


Skin and Soft Tissue Infections: A POCUS Guided Approach

Skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs) have a variety of potential causes, ranging in severity from mild infections like cellulitis to abscess all the way to life-threatening causes like necrotizing fasciitis.1 SSTIs are commonly encountered in the emergency department, with cellulitis and abscesses being the two most common.2 It is important to be able to recognize SSTIs and provide appropriate treatment. Abscesses require invasive management, whereas cellulitis is treated with systemic therapies; therefore, it is important to be able distinguish the different between the two types. Doing so can be difficult because of the hidden nature of abscesses. However, ultrasound can be a useful tool in establishing the presence of an abscess. This article is a review of the clinical approach and treatment for SSTIs, focusing on cellulitis and abscesses, as well as the use of ultrasound in helping to establish the diagnosis.


Approach

Clinical suspicion is the initial step in the diagnosis of SSTIs. These infections have multiple causes; therefore, obtaining a detailed history is crucial. Information about immunocompromised state, place of residence, travel, any recent trauma or surgery, previous antimicrobial use, lifestyle, hobbies, and animal bites is essential to developing an adequate differential diagnosis.3

A good understanding of the normal skin flora and common infectious organisms is key to assessing SSTIs. The most commons organisms implicated in SSTIs are Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus species.4-6 Methicillin resistant S. aureus (MRSA) being an important strain that has increased in prevalence in the past 20 years. Risk factors such as presence of abscess, intravenous drug use, previous MRSA status, antibiotics within 8 weeks, diabetes mellitus, and previous hospital admission within the last year increase the likelihood of the infection being cause by MRSA.4-6

Physical examination findings are crucial for establishing the presence of an SSTI; the typical criteria are a superficial lesion with the classic inflammatory findings of redness (rubor), swelling (tumor), warmth (calor), and pain (dolor).1,2,7 An abscess is defined as a fluctuant mass of puss localized and buried within a tissue, organ, or potential space; however, clinically it can be hard to determine to presence of this mass.2,7 Other associated signs and symptoms, such as crepitus, bullae, and hemorrhage, may be present upon diagnosis or may develop later during the course.2,7 Due to overlapping clinical presentations of the different SSTIs, it can be difficult to differentiate between them.


Cellulitis – No Abscess
Cellulitis – Possible Abscess
Abscess
Early Abscess

Assessment with POCUS:

Due to the similarities between different SSTI cutaneous findings and their different treatments, it is important to establish if there is an abscess present. It was common, before the introduction of ultrasound, to perform a blind needle aspiration of the infected area in order to determine the presence/absence of an abscess.8,9 However, this subjects that patient to the risks of an invasive procedure as well as pain. On the other hand, treating infection with empiric antibiotics in the presence of an unknown abscess delays drainage and allows for potential worsening of the infection.8,9

A study by Tayal et al. demonstrated that the use of ultrasound was beneficial in patients who had both low and high pretest probability for needing incision and drainage. In patients suspected of having simple cellulitis (low pretest), ultrasound was used to change management in over half of participants; establishing the need for drainage due to imaging of a fluid collection. The opposite was true in the patients suspected of having an abscess (high pretest); the study found that ultrasound was able to determine that more than half of this group did not need drainage, because of the absence of a fluid collection on imaging.10 Other studies have had similar findings, but the percent change in management was slightly lower.11

A study by Barbic et al. demonstrated that POCUS provided a rapid, non-invasive, painless, and easily repeatable test, that distinguished between abscess and cellulitis in the vast majority of cases. Their analysis concluded that POCUS had a sensitivity of 96.2% and a specificity of 82.9% in diagnosing the presence of an abscess.12 They concluded that POCUS can accurately diagnose abscess in paediatric and adult populations and is likely superior to clinical examination.12


Cobblestones

Classic finding for cellulitis (but not specific to cellulitis). There will be hyperechoic lobules of subcutaneous fat surrounded by relatively hypoechoic inflammatory fluid.13

Cobblestone – Cellulitis

Purulent Fluid Collection

Classic finding for an abscess; have a rounded shape of anechoic or hypoechoic fluid collection, and there will be surrounding areas of cobblestones from the overlying cellulitis.13 As well, there should be no color flow if doppler is applied to the area (helping to distinguish from lymph node or vessel).14

Abscess – Anechoic Collection
Possible Abscess or Lymph Node? – This is a lymph node – see below
Colour flow differentiates lymph node from abscess

Necrotizing Fasciitis

Because you do not want to miss it! Findings via ‘STAFF’; subcutaneous thickening, air, and fascial fluid.14 Note, that ultrasound does not to exclude the diagnosis. Also need clinical correlation to increase suspicion of such a serious infection.15

Necrotizing Fasciitis – STAFF

Treatment:

According to The Infectious Diseases Society of America (2014) guidelines, management of SSTIs is differentiated based on the presence/absence of purulence (i.e. abscess/fluid collection). They recommend that all purulent infections be treated with incision and drainage, with more severe infections (signs of systemic involvement) being cultured with sensitivities in order to add antibiotics to the treatment.16 Otherwise, non-purulent infections are to be treated with systemic antibiotics; the severity of the infection determining the route and choice of agent.16

Antibiotic therapy, in addition to incision and drainage of a skin abscess, is suggested for patients with any of the following:17

  • Single abscess ≥2 cm or multiple abscesses
  • Large are of surrounding cellulitis
  • Patients with immunosuppression or other comorbidities
  • Signs of systemic involvement (fever > 38°C, hypotension, or tachycardia)
  • Poor clinical response to incision and drainage alone
  • Presence of an indwelling medical device
  • High risk for adverse outcomes with endocarditis (these include a history of infective endocarditis, presence of prosthetic valve or prosthetic perivalvular material, unrepaired congenital heart defect, or valvular dysfunction in a transplanted heart)
  • High risk for transmission of aureus to others (such as in athletes or military personnel)

 

Horizon Health’s local trends recommend the following (see guideline or Spectrum app for full details)

Severity of Infection

 

 

Antibiotic

Mild

Moderate

Severe

Cephalexin 500 – 1000mg PO q6h x 5 days

ceFAZolin 2 g IV q8h x 5 days

ceFAZolin 2 g IV q8h +/- Clindamycin 900 mg IV q8h

If true beta-lactam allergy

Cefuroxime 500 mg PO BID or TID x 5 days

Clindamycin 600-900 mg IV q8h x5 days

 

If MRSA suspected

Septra 800/160 mg or 1600/320 mg PO q12h x 5 days

Vancomycin 25-30 mg/kg IV once then 15mg/kg IV q8 to q12h x 5 days

ADD Vancomycin 25-30 mg/kg IV once then 15mg/kg IV q8 to q12h

 


Some research is suggesting that POCUS can take the assessment of abscesses one step-further and impact management based on the depth and size of the fluid collection seen in imaging. Russell et al. found that abscesses less than 0.4cm below the skin surface could be effectively treated without incision and drainage.18 Another study found that patients, with skin abscesses less than or equal to 5cm in diameter, treatment with oral antibiotics in combination with incision and drainage had improved short-term outcomes compared to those patients treated with the procedure alone.18 While as mentioned above, UpToDate, suggests that antibiotics be used in single abscess greater than 2 cm in size. As well, research has found that ultrasound guided incision and drainage provides lower failure rates (less recurrent infections or multiple incisions) compared to blind incision and drainage. Likely due to better visualization of the abscess and more adequate initial drainage.19


Limitations

There are some limitations to POCUS for SSTIs: ultrasound imaging and interpretation rely on the user’s ability to obtain high-quality images in order to assess whether an abscess is present. It is important for the user to be familiar with different findings on ultrasound to guide appropriate treatment. An abscess may appear hypoechoic, hyperechoic, or anechoic (depending on tissue contents), and usually has posterior acoustic enhancement.19 Determining if it is drainable can be difficult due to this variability in imaging, and it is also quite common for early abscesses to present like cellulitis with erythema, no fluctuance, and an ultrasound that is negative for a fluid collection.20 In cases of a suspected evolving abscess, sometimes referred to as a non-ripe abscess, supportive care, including warm compresses, pain control, and close follow-up, is recommended.20 The practitioner may treat this like cellulitis; however, the patient may return with perceived failure of therapy if discharge advice does not include the possibility of of an abscess forming over time.


Abscess examples from the SJ archives


References

  1. Moffarah AS, Al Mohajer M, Hurwitz BL, Armstrong DG. Skin and Soft Tissue Infections. Microbiol Spectr. 2016 Aug;4(4). doi: 10.1128/microbiolspec.DMIH2-0014-2015.

 

  1. Martinez, N. “Skin and Soft-Tissue Infections: Itʼs More Than Just Skin Deep.” Advanced Emergency Nursing Journal, vol. 42, no. 3, 2020, pp. 196–203.

 

  1. Cieri, B., Conway, E., Sellick, J., & Mergenhagen, K. (2019). Identification of risk factors for failure in patients with skin and soft tissue infections. The American Journal of Emergency Medicine, 37(1), 48-52.

 

  1. Borgundvaag, B., Ng, W., Rowe, B., Katz, K., Farrell, Brian, Guimont, Chantal, . . . Gregson, Dan. (2013). Prevalence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in skin and soft tissue infections in patients presenting to Canadian emergency departments. CJEM, 15(3), 141-160.

 

  1. Esposito, S., De Simone, G., Pan, A., Brambilla, P., Gattuso, G., Mastroianni, C., . . . Savalli, F. (2019). Epidemiology and Microbiology of Skin and Soft Tissue Infections: Preliminary Results of a National Registry. Journal of Chemotherapy (Florence), 31(1), 9-14.

 

  1. Stenstrom, R., Grafstein, E., Romney, M., Fahimi, J., Harris, D., Hunte, G., . . . Christenson, J. (2009). Prevalence of and risk factors for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus skin and soft tissue infection in a Canadian emergency department. CJEM, 11(5), 430-8.

 

  1. Spelman, D., Baddour, LM. (2020). Cellulitis and skin abscess: Epidemiology, microbiology, clinical manifestations, and diagnosis In: UpToDate, Post TW (Ed), UpToDate, Waltham, MA. Retrieved November 11, 2020. From: https://www.uptodate.com/contents/cellulitis-and-skin-abscess-epidemiology-microbiology-clinical-manifestations-and-diagnosis?search=abscess%20treatment&topicRef=110530&source=see_link#H2443336514

 

  1. Comer, Amanda B. “Point-of-Care Ultrasound for Skin and Soft Tissue Infections.” Advanced Emergency Nursing Journal, vol. 40, no. 4, 2018, pp. 296–303.

 

  1. Gaspari, R., Sanseverino, A., & Gleeson, T. (2019). Abscess Incision and Drainage With or Without Ultrasonography: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Annals of Emergency Medicine, 73(1), 1-7.

 

  1. Tayal, V., Hasan, N., Norton, H., & Tomaszewski, C. (2006). The Effect of Soft‐tissue Ultrasound on the Management of Cellulitis in the Emergency Department. Academic Emergency Medicine, 13(4), 384-388.

 

  1. Alsaawi, A., Alrajhi, K., Alshehri, A., Ababtain, A., & Alsolamy, S. (2017). Ultrasonography for the diagnosis of patients with clinically suspected skin and soft tissue infections: A systematic review of the literature. European Journal of Emergency Medicine, 24(3), 162-169.

 

  1. Barbic, D., Chenkin, J., Cho, D., Jelic, T., & Scheuermeyer, F. (2017). In patients presenting to the emergency department with skin and soft tissue infections what is the diagnostic accuracy of point-of-care ultrasonography for the diagnosis of abscess compared to the current standard of care? A systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open, 7(1), E013688.

 

  1. Atkinson DP, Bowra J, Harris T, Jarman B, Lewis D, editors. Point of Care Ultrasound for Emergency Medicine and Resuscitation. Oxford University Press; 2019. pp. 140, 199-200.

 

  1. Gottlieb, M., Schmitz, G., Grock, A., & Mason, J. (2018). What to Do After You Cut: Recommendations for Abscess Management in the Emergency Setting. Annals of Emergency Medicine, 71(1), 31-33.

 

  1. Castleberg, E., Jenson, N., & Dinh, V. (2014). Diagnosis of necrotizing faciitis with bedside ultrasound: The STAFF Exam. The Western Journal of Emergency Medicine, 15(1), 111-113.

 

  1. Stevens, D., Bisno, A., Chambers, H., Dellinger, E., Goldstein, E., Gorbach, S., . . . Wade, J. (2014). Practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of skin and soft tissue infections: 2014 update by the infectious diseases society of America. Clinical Infectious Diseases : An Official Publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America, 59(2), 147-159.

 

  1. Spelman, D., Baddour, LM. (2020). Cellulitis and skin abscess in adults: treatment. In: UpToDate, Post TW (Ed), UpToDate, Waltham, MA. Retrieved November 11, 2020. From: https://www.uptodate.com/contents/cellulitis-and-skin-abscess-in-adults-treatment?search=abscess%20treatment&topicRef=110529&source=see_link

 

  1. Russell, F., Rutz, M., Rood, L., Mcgee, J., & Sarmiento, E. (2020). Abscess Size and Depth on Ultrasound and Association with Treatment Failure without Drainage. The Western Journal of Emergency Medicine, 21(2), 336-342.

 

  1. Gaspari, R., Sanseverino, A., & Gleeson, T. (2019). Abscess Incision and Drainage With or Without Ultrasonography: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Annals of Emergency Medicine, 73(1), 1-7.

 

  1. Thornton J, Hellmich T. Evaluation and Management of Abscesses in the Emergency Department. Emergency Medicine Reports. 2017 May 1;38(10).
Continue Reading

Fascia Iliaca Nerve Block

Hip Broke? Hip Block. Use of the fascia iliaca nerve block for analgesia in hip fractures.

Resident Clinical Pearl (RCP) July 2020

Luke Edgar, BScH MD

PGY1 Family Medicine Integrated Emergency Medicine

Dalhousie Saint John

 

Reviewed by Dr. David Lewis


Background

Hip fractures are a common and painful injury diagnosed and treated in the emergency department, with elderly patients representing the majority of cases. Advanced age, comorbidities, and increased sensitivity to side effects from systemic analgesia all pose challenges to achieving adequate pain control.1,2 Additionally, NSAID use in the elderly is frequently contraindicated due renal, cardiac, and gastrointestinal comorbidities as well as drug interactions. In elderly patients, both undertreated pain and opioid analgesia can precipitate delirium.3

Regional nerve blocks for the indication of hip and femoral neck fractures have been shown to reduce pain and need for IV opiates.1 Contraindications include infection over the injection site, patient refusal, and allergy to local anesthetic. Additionally, patients at risk for compartment syndrome (such as those with a concomitant ipsilateral tibial plateau fracture) should be selected cautiously as they may not reliably have increased pain after block.4

There are three main techniques described for regional nerve blocks to provide analgesia for hip and femoral neck fractures.1

  • Fascia Iliaca Nerve Block: Insert a needle through the fascia lata and fascia iliaca, to infiltrate dilute local anesthetic into the fascial compartment which diffuses to block the femoral, lateral femoral cutaneous, and obturator nerves.
  • Femoral Nerve Block: At the level of the femoral triangle, infiltrate local anesthetic around the femoral nerve.
  • 3-in-1 Femoral Nerve Block: At the level of the femoral triangle, infiltrate local anesthetic around the femoral nerve while applying pressure distal to the injection site, encouraging local anesthetic to track superiorly to block the femoral, lateral femoral cutaneous, and obturator nerves.

Figure 1. Lower limb peripheral nerve sensory distribution.5 Circled in red are the nerves blocked using the fascia iliaca technique. Cutaneous distribution of the obturator nerve is not depicted but consists of a small area on the proximal medial thigh.


Technique

Table 1. Supplies and equipment for performing a fascia iliaca nerve block

Table 2. Steps to complete a fascia iliaca nerve block6

Table 3. One person technique  – Steps to complete a fascia iliaca nerve block


Figure 2. Video demonstrating the sonoanatomy of the right femoral triangle. From lateral to medial, femoral nerve, artery and vein (NAVel), labeled with yellow, red, and blue arrows, respectively.


Figure 3. Sonoanatomy of the right femoral triangle, transverse view for the fascia iliaca nerve block.


Figure 4. Sonoanatomy of the right femoral triangle demonstrating ultrasound-guided needle placement using an in-plane technique. Note two pops should be felt as the needle crossed the two fascial planes.


 

For a visual review of these steps and ultrasonographic landmarks, please see the following videos and webpage by EM Ottawa, 5 Minute Sono, and NYSORA:

EM Ottawa

5 Minute Sono

NYSORA

Ultrasound-Guided Fascia Iliaca Block


 

Complications

Serious complications of this procedure are rare, but present.

  • Local Anesthetic Systemic Toxicity (LAST) as a complication of inadvertent intravenous or intra arterial anesthetic injection.7
    1. Incidence is 8 – 30 in 100,0008
    2. Manifestations typically occur within 20 minutes of injection (although onset can be as late as >1 hr) and are primarily neurologic and cardiovascular in nature. Neurologic effects include perioral numbness, metallic taste, mental status change or anxiety, muscle twitches and visual changes, followed by loss of consciousness and seizure. Cardiovascular effects are hypertension and tachycardia followed by arrhythmias, bradycardia, hypotension and cardiac arrest.
    3. Treatment is with intravenous lipid emulsion therapy (Intralipid 20%) 1.5 mL/kg bolus followed by 0.25 mL/kg/min, Maximum total dose 12 mL/kg. Contact your poison control centre if you suspect LAST.
    4. Prior to performing a fascia iliaca block, confirm availability of intralipid within your department to be used in the event of this rare complication.
  • Femoral Nerve injury secondary to intrafascicular injection
    1. Incidence 2-30/100,0008
    2. Most symptoms of paresthesias, numbness, and weakness resolved after several months in the event of this complication8
  • Other complications include infection, nerve block failure, injury secondary to numbness/weakness of limb, and allergy to the local anesthetic.

 

Take Home Message

Femoral nerve blocks are recommended for hip and femoral fractures to reduce pain and opioid analgesia requirements. Given that poor pain control and opioid analgesia are risk factors for delirium in elderly patients, hip blocks may also reduce rates of delirium (further study required). A fascia iliaca block with 20 cc of 0.5% bupivacaine is a well described technique with very few contraindications. To reduce the risk of complications, these blocks should be completed using sterile technique under ultrasound guidance with the help of an assistant. Hip broke? Hip block.

 


 

References

  • Ritcey B, Pageau P, Woo M, Perry J. Regional Nerve Blocks For Hip and Femoral Neck Fractures in the Emergency Department: A Systematic Review. CJEM 2015;18(1):37-47.
  • Hwang U, Richardson LD, Sonuyi TO, Morrison RS. The effect of emergency department crowding on the management of pain in older adults with hip fractures. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2006;54(2):270-5.
  • Morrison RS, Magaziner J, Gilbert M, et al. Relationship between pain and opioid analgesics on the development of delirium following hip fracture. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2003;58(1):76-81.
  • Erak M, EM Ottawa Grand Rounds. Ah, that feels better! The Use of Nerve Blocks in the ED. 2016. https://emottawablog.com/2016/10/ah-that-feels-better-the-use-of-nerve-blocks-in-the-ed/. Accessed July 25, 2020.
  • Gray H. 1918. Nerve supply of the leg. Anatomy of the Human Body. Image retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nerve_supply_of_the_human_leg. Accessed July 24, 2020
  • Woo M. How to perform the Ultrasound Guided Femoral Nerve Block. EM Ottawa. 2018. https://youtu.be/_OugsPA4rxY Accessed July 25, 2020.
  • Warren L, Pak A. Local anesthetic systemic toxicity. UpToDate. 2019. uptodate.com/contents/local-anesthetic-systemic-toxicity. Accessed July 25, 2019.
  • Helman, A, Morgenstern, J, Spiegel, R, Lee, J. Regional Nerve Blocks for Hip Fractures. Emergency Medicine Cases. August, 2018. https://emergencymedicinecases.com/regional-nerve-blocks-hip-fractures/. Accessed July 25, 2020.
  • Haines L, Dickman E, Ayvazyan S, et al. Ultrasound-guided fascia iliaca compartment block for hip fractures in the emergency department. J of Ultrasound in Emergency Medicine 2012;43(4):692-697.

 

Continue Reading

Lung PoCUS – Podcast

Lung PoCUS in Pediatric Emergency Medicine – Podcast

PoCUS Fellowship Clinical Pearl (RCP) May 2020

Dr. Mandy Peach (Emergency Physician and Dalhousie PoCUS Fellow, Saint John, NB, Canada)

Reviewed by Dr. David Lewis

 


Extract:

“My name is Mandy Peach and I am Emergency Physician at the Saint John Regional Hospital in Saint John, New Brunswick. I’m currently completing a PoCUS Fellowship and a pediatric rotation through the IWK Emergency Department in Halifax…….

What is the evidence for the use of PoCUS and diagnosing pediatric pneumonia. Well trained PoCUS Physicians can identify pneumonia with a sensitivity of 89% and a specificity of 94%, compared community-acquired pneumonia chest x-ray has a sensitivity of 69% and a specificity of 100%, if you see it great…. but what about early bacterial pneumonia and this case PoCUS has the upper hand, and if you consider consolidations behind the heart that can be visualized on PoCUS and obscured on chest x-ray – PoCUS 2  chest x-ray zero. So clearly it’s a useful tool to have when trying to differentiate between bacterial pneumonia that requires treatment and viral causes that would indicate conservative management. So how do we actually ultrasound the lungs…..the first step is to make the kid comfortable scan them in a position of comfort for example and their parents arms what the patient touch the ultrasound gel or the probe so it’s less of a scary thing maybe play their favourite music or YouTube video on the background or give them their favourite or snack do you want to choose a high frequency linear probe and scanning the longitudinal plane ……….”

 

Listen to the Podcast for some useful tips on performing and interpreting lung ultrasound in the pediatric population.

Continue Reading

PoCUS in COVID

Point of Care Ultrasound (PoCUS) during the Covid-19 pandemic – Is this point of care tool more efficacious than standard imaging?

Resident Clinical Pearl (RCP) May 2020

Dr. Colin Rouse– (PGY-3  CCFP Emergency Medicine) | Dalhousie University

and Dr. Sultan Alrobaian (Dalhousie PoCUS Fellow, Saint John, NB, Canada)

Reviewed by Dr. David Lewis

 


Case

A 70 year of woman present to the ED with a history of fever, cough and dyspnoea. After a full clinical assessment (with appropriate PPE), Lung PoCUS is performed.


Introduction

The Covid-19 Pandemic has created the largest international public health crisis in decades. It has fundamentally changed both societal norms and health care delivery worldwide. Changes have been implemented into resuscitation protocols including ACLS to prioritise appropriate donning of personal protective equipment (PPE) and consideration of resuscitation appropriateness prior to patient contact.1 Equipment has been removed from rooms to limit cross-contamination between patients. In this Pearl we will explore why PoCUS should not be discarded as an unnecessary tool and should be strongly considered in the assessment of a potential Covid Patient.

Disclaimer: Given the novel nature of CoVid-19 there is a lack of RCT data to support the use of PoCUS. These recommendations are based solely on expert opinion and case reports until superior evidence becomes available.


Potential Benefits of PoCUS

  • Lung PoCUS has increased sensitivity compared to conventional lung X-ray for known lung pathologies such as CHF4 and Pneumonia5 with similar specificities. Given that Pneumonia is the most common complication of Covid-19 it may help diagnose this complication in patients who have a normal CXR.
  • PoCUS can be performed by the assessing physician limiting the unnecessary exposure to other health care providers such and Radiologic Technologists and other staff in the diagnostic imaging department.
  • Lung PoCUS is low cost, repeatable and available in rural settings
  • Once pneumonia is diagnosed other potential complications can be sought including VTE and cardiovascular complications.

The assessment of the potential Covid-19 patient.

First one must consider the potential risk for coronavirus transmission at each patient encounter and ensure proper PPE2 for both oneself and the PoCUS device3.


Lung Ultrasound in the potential Covid-19 Patient

Technique

  • Appropriate level PPE
  • A low-frequency (3–5 MHz) curvilinear transducer
  • Set Focus to Pleural Line and turn off machine filters (e.g THI) to maximize artifacts
  • Scanning should be completed in a 12-zone assessment6
    • 2 anterior windows
    • 2 lateral windows
    • 2 posterior windows

Findings7

Mild Disease

  • Focal Patchy B-lines in early disease/mild infection (May have normal CXR at this point)
  • Areas of normal lung

 

Moderate/Severe Disease – Findings of bilateral Pneumonitis

  • B-lines begin to coalesce (waterfall sign)
  • Thickened and irregular pleura
  • Subpleural Hypoechoic consolidation      +/- air bronchograms

 

Other Covid-19 Pearls

  • Large/Moderate Pleural Effusion rarely seen in Covid-19 (consider another diagnosis) – Small peripleural effusions are common in COVID
  • The virus has a propensity for the base of the posterior lung windows and it imperative to include these views in your assessment.


Example COVID PoCUS Videos8

Confluent B Lines and small sub pleural consolidation

 

Patchy B lines and Irregular pleura

 

Irregular pleura

 

Air Bronchogram


CT & ultrasonographic features of COVID-19 pneumonia9

It has been noted that lung abnormalities may develop before clinical manifestations and nucleic acid detection with some experts recommending early Chest CT for screening suspected patients.10 Obviously there are challenges with this recommendation mainly regarding feasibility and infection control. A group of researchers in China compared Ultrasound and CT findings in 20 patients with COVID-19. Their findings are summarized in the table below:

Their conclusion was that ultrasound has a major utility for management of COVID-19 due to its safety, repeatability, absence of radiation, low cost and point of care use. CT can be reserved for patients with a clinical question not answered by PoCUS. CT is required to assess for pneumonia that does not extend to the pleura. Scatter artifact from aerated lung obscures visualization of deep lung pathology with PoCUS. When PoCUS is sufficient it can be used to assess disease severity at presentation, track disease evolution, monitor lung recruitment maneuvers and prone positioning and guide decisions related to weaning of mechanical ventilation.


Learning Points

  • Lung PoCUS is helpful in the initial assessment of the suspected or known COVID19 Patient
  • Lung PoCUS may reveal pathology not visible on CXR
  • Lung PoCUS can provide insight into COVID19 disease severity
  • Lung PoCUS is a useful tool to track disease progression in COVID19

Lung PoCUS in COVID Deep Dive

Deep Dive Lung PoCUS – COVID 19 Pandemic

 

 


References

  1. Edelson, D. P., Sasson, C., Chan, P. S., Atkins, D. L., Aziz, K., Becker, L. B., … & Escobedo, M. (2020). Interim Guidance for Basic and Advanced Life Support in Adults, Children, and Neonates With Suspected or Confirmed COVID-19: From the Emergency Cardiovascular Care Committee and Get With the Guidelines®-Resuscitation Adult and Pediatric Task Forces of the American Heart Association in Collaboration with the American Academy of Pediatrics, American Association for Respiratory Care, American College of Emergency Physicians, The Society of Critical Care Anesthesiologists, and American Society of …. Circulation.
  2. COVID-19 – Infection Protection and Control. http://sjrhem.ca/covid-19-infection-protection-and-control/
  3. Johri, A. M., Galen, B., Kirkpatrick, J. N., Lanspa, M., Mulvagh, S., & Thamman, R. (2020). ASE Statement on Point-of-Care Ultrasound (POCUS) During the 2019 Novel Coronavirus Pandemic. Journal of the American Society of Echocardiography.
  4. Maw, A. M., Hassanin, A., Ho, P. M., McInnes, M., Moss, A., Juarez-Colunga, E., Soni, N. J., Miglioranza, M. H., Platz, E., DeSanto, K., Sertich, A. P., Salame, G., & Daugherty, S. L. (2019). Diagnostic Accuracy of Point-of-Care Lung Ultrasonography and Chest Radiography in Adults With Symptoms Suggestive of Acute Decompensated Heart Failure: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. JAMA network open, 2(3), e190703. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.0703
  5. Balk, D. S., Lee, C., Schafer, J., Welwarth, J., Hardin, J., Novack, V., … & Hoffmann, B. (2018). Lung ultrasound compared to chest X‐ray for diagnosis of pediatric pneumonia: A meta‐analysis. Pediatric pulmonology, 53(8), 1130-1139.
  6. Wurster, C., Turner, J., Kim, D., Woo, M., Robichaud, L. CAEP. COVID-19 Town Hall April 15: Hot Topics in POCUS and COVID-19. https://caep.ca/covid-19-town-hall-april-15-hot-topics-in-pocus-and-covid-19/
  7. Riscinti, M. Macias, M., Scheel, T., Khalil, P., Toney, A., Thiessen, M., Kendell, J. Denver Health Ultrasound Card. http://www.thepocusatlas.com/covid19
  8. Images obtained from. Ultrasound in COVID-19. The PoCUS Atlas. http://www.thepocusatlas.com/covid19
  9. Peng, Q., Wang, X. & Zhang, L. Findings of lung ultrasonography of novel corona virus pneumonia during the 2019–2020 epidemic. Intensive Care Med (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-020-05996-6
  10. National Health Commission of the people’s Republic of China. Diagnosis and treatment of novel coronavirus pneumonia (trial, the fifth version)[EB/OL]. (2020-02-05)[2020-02-06]. http://www.nhc.gov.cn/yzygj/s7653p/202002/3b09b894ac9b4204a79db5b8912d4440.shtml
Continue Reading

Deep Dive Lung PoCUS – COVID 19 Pandemic

SJRHEM Weekly COVID-19 Rounds – May 2020

Dr. David Lewis


 

 

Part One covers aspects of core and advanced aspects of lung ultrasound application including: Zones, Technique, and Artifacts

Part Two covers PoCUS in COVID, the recent research, PoCUS findings, Infection Protection and Control, Indications and Pathways.


Part 1

 


Part 2

 

Continue Reading

Whose Line is it Anyway? – PoCUS in a Patient with Dyspnea

Medical Student Clinical Pearl – March 2020

Nguyet (Na) Nguyen

MD Class of 2021
Memorial University of Newfoundland

Reviewed and Edited by Dr. David Lewis

All case histories are illustrative and not based on any individual


 

Case Report

ID: 60 y/o M with dyspnea presenting to the ED late evening

HPI: Patient complained of increasing SOB starting the morning on day of presentation, with a worsening 3 days of non-productive cough. No chest pain or other cardiac features. No complaint suggestive of URTI or GI illness. Patient was given Atrovent and Ventolin en route by EMS, and was allegedly moving more air into his lungs after this intervention. Patient reports no ankle swelling, paroxysmal nocturnal dyspnea, but reports using 2 pillows to elevate himself when sleeping. Patient reports no fever, unexplained weight loss or fatigue.

Past medical history includes chronic back pain, DM, atrial fibrillation, peripheral DM-related ulcers, chronic kidney disease, BPH, colon cancer with hepatic metastases. Past surgical history significant for 5x CABG, liver and colon resection.

His medications are amitriptyline 10mg PO qhs, acetaminophen 650mg PO BID, dutasteride 0.5mg PO daily, ferrous sulfate 300mg PO daily, furosemide 40mg PO BID, metformin 500mg BID, pantoprazole 40mg PO BID, pregabalin 150mg PO BID, primidone 125mg PO daily, rosuvastatin 40mg PO qhs, rivaroxaban 15mg PO daily.

He has a distant 10 pack-years smoking history, drinks alcohol occasionally, and does not use recreational drugs. The patient lives with his wife in their own home.

Physical exam: Patient was markedly pale, non-diaphoretic, in tripod position with increased work of breathing. His temperature was 36.9, regular pulse rate at 105, respiratory rate 22, oxygen saturation 90% on room air and a nebulizer mask through which he was receiving aerosolized Atrovent and Ventolin. His BP was 125/78mmHg.

Cardiovascular exam revealed distant S1S2 in a chest with no visible deformity. His JVD was at the level of the sternal angle, there was no pedal edema bilateral. Capillary refill was 3 seconds bilateral at the thumbs. Percussion revealed no focal dullness, however on auscultation, basal crackles were heard more prominently in the right lung base, though also present on the left. There were also wheezes noted in the upper lobes heard in the anterior chest. Abdomen was soft, non-distended, non-tender. Neurological exam unremarkable.

Investigations: ECG showed sinus tachycardia with a LBBB, bloods drawn for routine labs, VBG, lactate, CXR ordered.

Differential diagnosis: AECOPD vs congestive heart failure.

PoCUS (Arrival Time + 10 mins): B-lines were observed in both lungs when a curvilinear probe was placed over different areas of the anterior chest. A small pleural effusion was also noted at the bottom of the right lung. B-lines represent increased fluid in an area of the lung, and given different clinical contexts maye represent pulmonary edema, pneumonia, or pulmonary contusion. In this case the most likely explanation for bilateral diffuse B-Lines is CHF and Pulmonary Edema. 

Working Diagnosis (Arrival Time + 10 mins): CHF and Pulmonary Edema

Management (Arrival Time + 15 mins): Pending transfer fo CXR and results of investigations the patient was treated with intravenous diuretics. He passed 500mls of urine and his symptoms improved considerably.

 

Investigations Results (Arrival Time + 45 mins): leukocytes 6.4, hemoglobin 83, platelet 165, sodium 140, potassium 5/0, chloride 101, creatinine 120, urea 11.7, glucose 17.0. Venous blood gas showed pH 7.31, pCO2 555, HCO3- 28 and lactate 2.7.

CXR (Arrival Time + 45 mins):

CXR was similar to above, this image is from: https://radiopaedia.org/cases/acute-pulmonary-oedema-6

 

Final impression: Congestive heart failure


What are B Lines?

These are the ultrasound equivalent of Kerley-B lines often reported on chest X-ray, which indicate edema in the lungs. For an exam to be positive (i.e indicative of pathology), one needs to see a minimum of 3 B-lines per view. B-lines look like flashlight beams traveling undisrupted down the entire ultrasound screen, as seen in the images above obtained during the exam.

These need to be distinguished from other artifacts such as ‘A-lines’ and ‘comet tails’. A-lines are seen in normal lungs. These are ‘repetitive reverberation’ artifacts of the normal pleura in motion. (Figure 1)(1)

‘Comet tails’- reported first by Lichenstein et al. in 1998 (although he was describing B-Lines in this paper) (Figure 2) (1), are ‘short, hypoechoic artifacts’ that only descend vertically partially down the screen. These are normal lung artifacts. This paper explains “a common misunderstanding in lung ultrasound” nomenclature that stems from Lichtenstein’s original paper.

Download pdf

 

From: https://www.mdedge.com/emergencymedicine/article/96697/imaging/emergency- ultrasound-lung-assessment

 


More on Comet Tails Artifact in this post from LitFL:

Comet tail artefact

 


 

Protocols

There are multiple protocols that guide the ultrasound technique (4) , some of which are:

  • Lichenstein et al (1998): longitudinal scans of anterior and lateral chest walls of patients in semi- recumbent position. Positive test defined as bilateral multiple B-lines diffuse anterolateral or lateral. The protocol had reported sensitivity (true positive) of 100%, and specificity (true negative) 92% for cardiogenic pulmonary edema. Blue Protocol (2015)
  • Liteplo et al (2008): anterior and lateral chest walls with patient supine: each chest divided into 4 zones (anterior, lateral, upper and lower). Positive test: pathologic pattern found in >1 zone on each side, with both sides involved.
  • Volpicelli et al. (2008): longitudinal scans of supine patients with chest divided into 11 areas (3 anterior R, 3 lateral R, 2 anterior L, 3 lateral L) to obtain score 0-11. Scores strongly correlated with radiologic and BNP (lab marker of CHF) at presentation.

 

 


 

What is the Evidence?

Al Deeb et al. conducted a systematic review and analysis of prospective cohort and prospective case-control studies in the ED, IDU, inpatient wards and prehospital settings (n = 1075). This was published in Acad Emerg Med (2014), which reported a sensitivity of 94.1% for using B-lines to diagnosis acute cardiogenic pulmonary edema (ACPE), and a specificity of 92.4% for patients with a moderate- high pretest probability for ACPE.

The SIMEU Multicenter study reported in 2015 reported a significantly higher accuracy (97% sensitivity and 97.4% specificity) with an approach incorporating lung ultrasound (LUS) in differentiating acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) and non-cardiac causes of acute dyspnea, compared to approaches using the initial clinical workup (past medical history, history of presenting illness, physical examination, ECG, ABG), chest X-ray alone and natriuretic peptides.

Martindale et al. reported in 2016 (Academic Emergency Medicine) high positive likelihood ratio of pulmonary edema observed on lung ultrasound and low negative likelihood ratio of B-line pattern on lung US in affirming the presence of acute heart failure, after a systematic review and analysis of 57 prospective and cross-sectional studies (n = 1,918).

A useful Systematic Review “Emergency department ultrasound for the detection of B-lines in the early diagnosis of acute decompensated heart failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis ” from McGivery et al from SJRHEM (7), was published in 2018.


 

Learning Point

For a patient presenting to the ER with dyspnea, using PoCUS to observe 3 or more B-lines in two bilateral lung zones +/- pleural effusion can rapidly guide an accurate diagnosis of acute congestive heart failure.


 

References

  1. Taylor, T., Meer, J., Beck, S. Emerg Med. (2015) https://www.mdedge.com/emergencymedicine/article/96697/imaging/emergency- ultrasound-lung-assessment Last accessed Feb 29, 2020
  2. Lee, FCY, Jenssen, C., Dietrich, CF Med Ultrason (2018); 20(3): 379-384
  3. Ang SH. & Andrus P Curr Cardiol Rev. 2012 May; 8(2): 123-136https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3406272/
  4. Al. Deeb M., Barbic S., Featherstone R., Dankoff J., Barbic D. Acad Emerg Med 2014 Aug; 21(8): 843-52 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25176151
  5. Pivetta E et al. Chest. 2015 Jul; 148(1): 202-210 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/25654562/
  6. Martindale JL, Wakai A, Collins SP, Levy PD, Diercks D, Hiestand BC, Fermann GJ, deSouza I, Sinert R, Acad Emerg Med. 2016 Mar; 23(3): 223-242 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26910112
  7. McGivery K, Atkinson P, Lewis D, et al. Emergency department ultrasound for the detection of B-lines in the early diagnosis of acute decompensated heart failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis. CJEM. 2018;20(3):343‐352. doi:10.1017/cem.2018.27

 

Continue Reading

Introduction to Transesophageal Echo – Basic Technique

Thanks to Dr. Jennifer Cloutier, Cardiac Anesthesiologist, for delivering a great session.


This beginner guide is designed for those familiar with transthoracic echo and just starting to use TEE. ED indications and TEE utility in the emergency setting are briefly discussed at the end of this post.


Requirements

  • Sterile transducer – This requires a sterilization facility, protocol and collaboration with other departments
  • Patient preparation – In ED usually intubated, unconscious or sedated.
  • Optional – spray the transducer with topical local anesthetic

Contraindications

  • Suspected esophageal perforation, stricture or trauma
  • Varices

Insertion

  • Hold transducer control module with left hand and support against your abdomen (see pic 1)
  • Extend transducer to full length, holding end with right hand
  • Check the control wheels are functioning correctly before inserting the transducer
  • Ensure transducer head is facing upwards (use anterior length markings to maintain orientation)
  • Insert transducer on left side of tongue
  • Use bite guard – e.g cut corrugated airway tubing
  • Advance to mid esophagus
  • Look for left atrium – this is the first window

 

Orientation

The transducer can be manipulated into several orientations:

  • Rotate control module clockwise to orientate to patient right
  • Rotate control module anticlockwise to orientate to patient left
  • Rotate “Big Wheel” clockwise to antiflex and orientate anteriorly
  • Rotate “Big Wheel” anticlockwise to retroflex and orientate posteriorly
  • Rotate “Small Wheel” clockwise to flex right
  • Rotate “Small Wheel” anticlockwise to flex left
  • Advance transducer deeper into esophagus
  • Withdraw transducer less deeply in esophagus

(a) Advance, withdraw: Pushing or pulling the tip of the TEE probe; (b) turn to right, turn to left (also referred as clockwise and anticlockwise): rotating the anterior aspect of the TEE probe to the right or left of the patient; (c) anteflex, retroflex: anteflex is flexing the tip of the TEE probe anteriorly by turning the large control wheel clockwise. Retroflex is flexing the tip of the TEE probe posteriorly by turning the large wheel anticlockwise; (d) Flex to right, Flex to left: flexing the tip of the TEE probe with the small control wheel to the patient’s right or left. The probe flexion to the right and left may not be necessary and should be avoided to minimize trauma to the esophagus 

 

 

Multiplane Imaging Angle

With all modern TEE transducers the transducer beam can be rotated within the probe to generate different beam angles. This is achieved using 2 buttons on the control module, one button rotates from 0 to 180 degrees, the other button rotates it back from 180 to 0 degrees. Using the buttons in combination any desired angle between 0 and 180 degrees can be achieved.

At 0 degrees the transducer beam is transverse (orientated Left screen – Right patient)

At 90 degrees the transducer beam is longitudinal

At 180 degrees the transducer beam is transverse (orientated Left screen – Left patient)

 

Multiplane Imaging angle is depicted on the monitor using a pictogram dial.

In this example the TEE probe is located in the Mid Esophageal location. View A – the multiplane imaging angle is 10 degrees and a 4 chamber view is generated. View B – the multiplane imaging angle is 90 degrees and a 2 chamber view is generated.

 

 


 

Useful video tutorial explaining orientation

 

 


 

Core Views

For the beginner, standard views can be achieved by using a guide that shows the location of the transducer (e.g Mid Esophageal, Trans-Gastric along with the optimal multiplane angle (see below).

Clearly every patient will have slightly different anatomy and cardiac axis, so these guides are just a starting point. Fine tuning of all the above will be required.

The Consensus Statement of the American Society of Echocardiography and the Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists provides an excellent outline of the basic perioperative TEE examination. Although this examination is likely to be much more comprehensive than what is needed in the Emergency Department (e.g during a code or peri arrest), it provides a useful guide to practicing all the important views that may be required in most situations.

 


 

This short video tutorial provides a useful outline of core views

 


ME 4 Chamber View


 

Indications

  • Cardiac Arrest – continuous echo evaluation of cardiac contractility, without impacting chest compression
  • Peri Arrest – assists with diagnosis and fluid resuscitation,
  • Undifferentiated Hypotension – assists with diagnosis and fluid resuscitation

US Probe: Transesophageal Echocardiography in Cardiac Arrest

The post above and the article below provide a more detailed discussion on the use of TEE in cardiac arrest.

New Concepts of Ultrasound in the Emergency Department: Focused Cardiac Ultrasound in Cardiac Arrest

 

 


References

Reeves ST, Finley AC, Skubas NJ, et al. Basic perioperative transesophageal echocardiography examination: a consensus statement of the American Society of Echocardiography and the Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2013;26(5):443–456. doi:10.1016/j.echo.2013.02.015

Arntfield, Robert et al. Focused Transesophageal Echocardiography by Emergency Physicians is Feasible and Clinically Influential: Observational Results from a Novel Ultrasound Program. Journal of Emergency Medicine, Volume 50, Issue 2, 286 – 294

 


Further Reading and Viewing

 

Continue Reading

PoCUS in Pericardial Effusion

Medical Student Clinical Pearl – October 2019

 

Alex Pupek

Faculty of Medicine
Dalhousie University
CC4
Class of 2020

Reviewed and Edited by Dr. David Lewis

All case histories are illustrative and not based on any individual


Case

A 70F with a history of bladder CA, HTN and 4.9cm AAA presented to the Emergency Department (ED) and was Triaged as Level 3 with a chief complaint of generalized weakness. Initial assessment was significant for hypotension and low-grade fever with dysuria elicited on history; she was started on Ceftriaxone with a working diagnosis of urosepsis. Bloodwork and imaging studies were sent to rule out other potential sources of infection.

She had a mild leukocytosis of 12.4, pH of 7.23 and a lactate of 5.0. Point-of-care urinalysis was unremarkable. The chest x-ray revealed an enlarged cardiothoracic ratio of 0.62 compared to 0.46 ten months previously, concerning for a pericardial effusion.

Upon reassessment, the patient appeared unwell with slight mottling to the skin, cool extremities and tenuous blood pressure; point of care ultrasound revealed a large pericardial effusion.  Interventional cardiology was paged; the patient was moved to the trauma area and an emergent pericardiocentesis was performed: 360cc of bloody fluid was removed. The pericardial drain was left in situ.

Post-procedure bloodwork included a troponin of 216 and CK of 204. The patient was admitted to the Cardiac Care Unit and discharged within a week’s time.

 


Pericardial Effusions and The Role of Point-of-Care Ultrasound (POCUS)

The normal pericardial sac contains up to 50 mL of plasma ultrafiltrate [1]. Any disease affecting the pericardium can contribute to the accumulation of fluid beyond 50mL, termed a pericardial effusion. The most commonly identified causes of pericardial effusions include malignancy and infection (Table 1).

 

Table 1 – UpToDate, 2019 – Diagnosis and Treatment of Pericardial Effusions


 

Evaluation of the pericardium with point-of-care ultrasound includes one of four standard views: parasternal long axis, parasternal short axis, subxiphoid and apical (Figure 1). A pericardial effusion appears as an anechoic stripe or accumulation surrounding the heart. Larger effusions may completely surround the heart while smaller fluid collections form only a thin stripe layering out posteriorly with gravity. Seen most commonly post-cardiac surgery, pericardial effusions may be loculated and compress only a portion of the heart. [1,2] (Table 2)

Figure 1[1]


Table 2 [2]


 

Both the pericardial fat pad and pleural effusions can be mistaken for pericardial effusions. The parasternal long-axis view is most helpful to accurately define the effusion with the descending aorta, posterior to the mitral valve and left atrium, serving as a landmark: the posterior pericardial reflection is located anterior to this structure. Fluid anterior to the posterior pericardial wall is pericardial, whereas a pleural effusion will lie posterior. The pericardial fat pad is an isolated dark area with bright speckles, located anteriorly; unlike fluid, it is not gravity dependent. Rather than competing with the cardiac chambers for space within the pericardial sac, the fat pad moves synchronously with the myocardium throughout the cardiac cycle. [1,2] (Figure 2)

Figure 2[1]


A pericardial effusion discovered on POCUS in the ED may be mistaken for tamponade, leading to inappropriate and invasive management in the form of pericardiocentesis.[2]

Patient tolerance of pericardial effusions depends on the rate by which they accumulate. As little as 150-200 mL of rapidly accumulating effusion can cause tamponade whereas much larger amounts of slowly accumulating fluid can be well tolerated. Pericardial effusions formed gradually are accommodated by adaptations in pericardial compliance. A tamponade physiology is reached once the intrapericardial pressure overcomes the pericardial stretch limit.[2] (Figure 3)

Figure 3[2]


The core echocardiographic findings of pericardial tamponade consist of:

  • a pericardial effusion
  • diastolic right ventricular collapse (high specificity)
  • systolic right atrial collapse (earliest sign)
  • a plethoric inferior vena cava with minimal respiratory variation (high sensitivity)
  • exaggerated respiratory cycle changes in mitral and tricuspid valve in-flow velocities as a surrogate for pulsus paradoxus

In the unstable patient with clinical and echocardiographic findings of tamponade, an emergent pericardiocentesis is indicated.[2]

A retrospective cohort study of non-trauma emergency department patients with large pericardial effusions or tamponade, ultimately undergoing pericardiocentesis, found that effusions identified by POCUS in the ED rather than incidentally or by other means saw a decreased time to drainage procedures, (11.3 vs 70.2 hours, p=0.055).[3]

Point of care ultrasound is a valuable tool during the initial evaluation of the undifferentiated hypotensive emergency department patient but should be interpreted judiciously and within clinical context to avoid unnecessary emergency procedures.


Additional Images

From GrepMed


 

echocardiogram-pericardial-tamponade-alternans-effusion

 


References

  1. Goodman, A., Perera, P., Mailhot, T., & Mandavia, D. (2012). The role of bedside ultrasound in the diagnosis of pericardial effusion and cardiac tamponade. Journal of emergencies, trauma, and shock, 5(1), 72.
  2. Alerhand, S., & Carter, J. M. (2019). What echocardiographic findings suggest a pericardial effusion is causing tamponade?. The American journal of emergency medicine, 37(2), 321-326.
  3. Alpert, E. A., Amit, U., Guranda, L., Mahagna, R., Grossman, S. A., & Bentancur, A. (2017). Emergency department point-of-care ultrasonography improves time to pericardiocentesis for clinically significant effusions. Clinical and experimental emergency medicine, 4(3), 128.

 

Continue Reading

Pediatric Hip PoCUS

Pediatric Hip PoCUS

PoCUS Pearl

Dr. Sultan Ali Alrobaian

Dalhousie EM PoCUS Fellowship

Saint John, NB

@AlrobaianSultan

 

Reviewed and Edited by Dr. David Lewis


 

Case:

A 5 year old healthy boy, came to ED with history of limping since waking that morning. He had worsening right hip discomfort. No history of trauma. He had history of cold symptoms for the last 3 days associated with documented low grade fever.

On physical examination, he looked uncomfortable and unwell looking, he had temperature of 38.1 C, HR 130, BP 110/70, RR 20 and O2 saturation of 98% on RA. He was non-weight-bearing with decreased ROM of right hip because of pain.

Pelvis x-ray was unremarkable, he had WBC of 14.4 x 103  and CRP of 40 .

PoCUS of the right hip was performed.


 

Pediatric Hip Ultrasound

Ultrasonography is an excellent modality to evaluate pathologies in both the intra-articular and extra-articular soft tissues including muscles, tendons, and bursae. PoCUS to detect hip effusion can serve as an adjunct to the history and physical examination in case with hip pain.  It is easily accessible, no radiation exposure and low cost.

Technique:

The child should be in supine position. Expose the hip with drapes for patient comfort. If the patient will tolerate it, position the leg in slight abduction and external rotation. A high frequency linear probe is the preferred transducer to scan the relatively superficial pediatric hip, use the curvilinear probe if increased depth is required.

With the patient lying supine, identify the greater trochanter on the symptomatic hip of the patient. Place the linear probe in the sagittal oblique plane parallel to the long axis of the femoral neck (with the indicator toward the patient’s head).

If the femoral neck cannot easily be found, it can be approached using the proximal femur. Place the probe transversely across the upper thigh. Identify the cortex of the proximal femur and then move the probe proximally until the femoral neck appears medially, then slightly rotate the probe and move medially to align in the long axis of the femoral neck.

Assistance is often required from a parent who may be asked to provide reassurance, apply the gel and help with positioning.

Both symptomatic and asymptomatic hips should be examined.

Negative hip ultrasound in a limping child should prompt examination of the knee and ankle joint (for effusion) and the tibia (for toddler’s fracture)

Hip X-ray should be performed to rule out other causes (depending on age – e.g. Perthes, Osteomyelitis, SCFE, Tumour). Limb X-ray should be performed if history of trauma or NAI.

 

Anatomy of the Pediatric Hip:

The ED Physician should readily identify the sonographic landmarks of the pediatric hip. These landmarks include the femoral head, epiphysis and neck, acetabulum, joint capsule and iliopsoas muscle and tendon.

 

A normal joint may have a small anechoic stripe (normal hypoechoic joint cartilage) between cortex and capsule. This will measure less than 2mm and be symmetrical between hips.

 

Ultrasound Findings:

Measure the maximal distance between the anterior surface of the femoral neck and the posterior surface of the iliopsoas muscle. An effusion will result in a larger anechoic stripe (>2mm) that takes on a lenticular shape as the capsule distends. Asymmetry between hips is confirmatory. Synovial thickening may also be visualized.

FH- Femoral Head, S- Synovium, E – Effusion, FN – Femoral Neck

Criteria for a pediatric hip effusion is:

  • A capsular-synovial thickness of 5 mm measured at the concavity of the femoral neck, from the anterior surface of the femoral neck to the posterior surface of the iliopsoas muscle
  • OR a 2-mm difference compared to the asymptomatic contralateral hip

Right hip effusion, normal left hip, arrow heads – joint capsule, IP – iliopsoas


Interpretation

PoCUS has high sensitivity and specificity for pediatric hip effusion.

  • —
  • Sensitivity of 90%
  • Specificity of 100%
  • Positive predictive value of 100%
  • Negative predictive value of 92%

 

PoCUS cannot determine the cause of an effusion. It cannot differentiate between transient synovitis and septic arthritis. Diagnosis will be determined by combining history, pre-test probability, examination, inflammatory markers and PoCUS findings. If in doubt, septic arthritis is the primary differential diagnosis until proven otherwise.

Several clinical prediction algorithms have been proposed. This post from pedemmorsels.com outlines these nicely:

 

Septic Arthritis

 

 


 

Back to our case:

Ultrasonography cannot definitively distinguish between septic arthritis and transient synovitis, the ED physician’s concern for septic arthritis should be based on history, clinical suspicion and available laboratory findings.

The patient was diagnosed as case of septic arthritis. The patient received intravenous antibiotics empirically. Pediatric orthopedic consultation was obtained, and ED arthrocentesis was deferred as the patient was immediately taken to the operating room for hip joint aspiration and irrigation, confirming the diagnosis.


 

References

 

Continue Reading

Color Flow Doppler to Assess Cardiac Valve Competence

Color Flow Doppler to Assess Cardiac Valve Competence

Resident Clinical Pearl (RCP) April 2019

Dr. Scott Foley – CCFP-EM PGY3 Dalhousie University, Halifax NS

Reviewed by Dr. David Lewis

 


 

Background:

When colour Doppler is initiated, the machine uses the principals of the Doppler effect to determine the direction of movement of the tissues off which it is reflecting.

The Doppler effect is the change in frequency of a wave in relation to an observer who is moving relative to a wave source. It was named after the Austrian physicist Christian Doppler who first described the phenomenon in 1842. The classic example is the change in pitch of a siren heard from an ambulance as it moves towards and away from an observer.

These principles are applied to POCUS in the form of colour Doppler where direction of flow is reflected by the colour (Red = moving towards the probe, Blue = moving away from the probe), and the velocity of the flow is reflected by the intensity of the colour (brighter colour = higher velocity).
*Note: the colour does not represent venous versus arterial flow.

 

The use of colour Doppler ultrasound can be useful in the emergency department to determine vascular flow in peripheral vessels as well as through the heart. It is one way to determine cardiac valve competency by focusing on flow through each valve.


 

Obtaining Views:

To optimize valve assessment, proper views of each valve must be obtained. It is best to have the direction of the ultrasound waves be parallel to the direction of flow. External landmarks for the views used are seen below:

  • Mitral Valve and Tricuspid Valve: The best view for each of these is the apical 4 chamber view. If unable to obtain this view, the mitral valve can be seen in parasternal long axis as well.
  • Aortic Valve: The best view is the apical 5 chamber or apical 3 chamber but are challenging to obtain. Instead, the parasternal long axis is frequently used.
  • Pulmonic Valve: Although not commonly assessed, the parasternal short axis can be used.
  • Visit 5minutesono.com for video instruction on obtaining views

Parasternal long axis: MV, AV

Parasternal short axis: PV, TV

Apical 4 chamber: TV, MV


 

Assessing Valvular Competency:

How to examine valvular competency:

  1. Get view and locate valve in question
  2. Visually examine valve: opening, closing, calcification
  3. Use colour Doppler:
    1. Place colour box over valve (as targeted as possible (resize select box) to not include other valves)
    2. Freeze image and scroll through images frame by frame
    3. Examine for pathologic colour jets in systole and diastole
  4. Estimating severity:
    1. Grade 1 – jet noticeable just at valve
    2. Grade 2 – jet extending out 1/3 of atrium/ventricle
    3. Grade 3 – jet extending out 2/3 of atrium/ventricle
    4. Grade 4 – jet filling entire atrium/ventricle

See video tutorial below for more


Mitral Regurgitation A4C

Tricuspid Regurgitation A4C

Aortic Stenosis PSLA


Bottom line:

Color flow Doppler on POCUS is a straightforward way to assess for valvular competency in the Emergency Department. A more detailed valvular assessment requires skill, knowledge and experience.

 


Useful Video Tutorials:

Mitral Regurgitation

 

Aortic Stenosis vs Sclerosis

Tricuspid Valve


References:

  1. https://www.radiologycafe.com/medical-students/radiology-basics/ultrasound-overview
  2. By Patrick J. Lynch and C. Carl Jaffe – http://www.yale.edu/imaging/echo_atlas/views/index.html, CC BY 2.5, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=21448310
  3. 5minutesono.com
  4. ECCU ShoC 2018 powerpoint, Paul Atkinson, David Lewis
Continue Reading