ABSTRACT
Objective: Nitroglycerin is a first-line treatment for hypertensive acute heart failure syndrome (AHFS). However, nicardipine is frequently used to treat hypertensive emergencies, including AHFS. In this study, we compared the effectiveness of nicardipine and nitroglycerin in patients with hypertensive AHFS.Patients and Methods: This single-center, retrospective, observational study was conducted at the intensive care unit of a Japanese hospital. Patients diagnosed with AHFS and systolic blood pressure 140 mmHg on arrival between April 2013 and March 2021 were included. The outcomes were the time to optimal blood pressure control, duration of continuous infusion of antihypertensive agents, duration of positive pressure ventilation, need for additional antihypertensive agents, length of hospital stay, and body weight changes. Outcomes were compared between the nicardipine and nitroglycerin groups. We also compared these outcomes between the groups after excluding patients who received renal replacement therapy.Results: Fifty-eight patients were enrolled (26 and 32 patients were treated with nitroglycerin and nicardipine, respectively). The nicardipine group had a shorter time to optimal blood pressure control (2.0 [interquartile range, 2.0–8.5] h vs. 1.0 [0.5–2.0] h), shorter duration of continuous anti-hypertensive agent infusion (3.0 [2.0–5.0] days vs. 2.0 [1.0–2.0] days), less frequent need for additional anti-hypertensive agents (1 patients [3.1%] vs. 11 patients [42.3%]), and shorter length of hospital stay (17.5 [10.0–33.0] days vs. 9.0 [5.0–15.0] days) than the nitroglycerin group. The duration of positive pressure ventilation and body weight changes were similar between the groups. The outcomes were similar after excluding patients who received renal replacement therapy.Conclusion: Nicardipine may be more effective than nitroglycerin for treating hypertensive AHFS.
ABSTRACT
Objective: Herein, we report a patient with acute cerebral infarction with a favorable prognosis after being managed by a general physician with support from the telestroke program.Patient and Methods: An 85-year-old man was transferred to a regional hospital due to sudden onset of dysarthria and left hemiparesis. As no neurosurgeons or neurologists were available in that hospital or area, the patient was examined by a general physician who diagnosed him with cardioembolic stroke on the left middle cerebral artery territory. The physician consulted a stroke specialist using the telestroke system; with the support from the telestroke program, the physician administered thrombolytic therapy 4 hours and 10 minutes after the onset of symptoms.Results: The patient’s National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score improved from 9 to 3 and he was subsequently transferred to the stroke center. However, the occluded left middle cerebral artery had already re-canalized. His hemiparesis completely improved one week after the onset.Conclusion: A telemedicine system for general physicians is indispensable in areas without accessible stroke specialists as it provides access to a standard of care for hyper-acute stroke patient assessment and management, and helps improve neuroprognosis.
ABSTRACT
<p><b>Objective:</b> Involvement of all regional medical facilities in a trauma system is challenging in rural regions. We hypothesized that the physician-staffed helicopter emergency medical service potentially encouraged local facilities to participate in trauma systems by providing the transport of patients with trauma to those facilities in a rural setting.</p><p><b>Materials and Methods:</b> We performed two retrospective observational studies. First, yearly changes in the numbers of patients with trauma and destination facilities were surveyed using records from the Miyazaki physician-staffed helicopter emergency medical service from April 2012 to March 2014. Second, we obtained data from medical records regarding the mechanism of injury, severity of injury, resuscitative interventions performed within 24 h after admission, secondary transports owing to undertriage by attending physicians, and deaths resulting from potentially preventable causes. Data from patients transported to the designated trauma center and those transported to non-designated trauma centers in Miyazaki were compared.</p><p><b>Results:</b> In total, 524 patients were included. The number of patients transported to non-designated trauma centers and the number of non-designated trauma centers receiving patients increased after the second year. We surveyed 469 patient medical records (90%). There were 194 patients with major injuries (41%) and 104 patients with multiple injuries (22%), and 185 patients (39%) received resuscitative interventions. The designated trauma centers received many more patients with trauma (366 vs. 103), including many more patients with major injuries (47% vs. 21%, <i>p</i> < 0.01) and multiple injuries (25% vs. 13%, <i>p</i> < 0.01), than the non-designated trauma centers. The number of patients with major injuries and patients who received resuscitative interventions increased for non-designated trauma centers after the second year. There were 9 secondary transports and 26 deaths. None of these secondary transports resulted from undertriage by staff physicians and none of these deaths resulted from potentially preventable causes.</p><p><b>Conclusion:</b> The rural physician-staffed helicopter emergency medical service potentially encouraged non-designated trauma centers to participate in trauma systems while maintaining patient safety.</p>
ABSTRACT
<b>Objective:</b> Rescuing severe trauma patients who are injured far from a trauma center is challenging for rural emergency systems. We report a severe trauma case that occurred at a remote location, in which the patient’s life was saved by a dispatched doctor car and a physician from a local medical facility.<br><b>Patient:</b> A 31-year-old man experienced a left femur injury due to a fallen tree. The fire station requested a doctor car from our center, approximately 56 km away. Meanwhile, a paramedic team reported that the patient was in a state of shock. The doctor car docked over 1 h after the accident. Pressure hemostasis, rapid intravenous infusion, and tracheal intubation were performed en route. After arrival at our hospital, an emergency blood transfusion was administered; the injured blood vessel was sutured and the wound closed. On day 22, the patient was transferred to another hospital for rehabilitation.<br><b>Discussion:</b> Rapid response-type doctor car is often considered ineffective for distant severe trauma cases. However, this case demonstrates the benefits of a doctor car working with local medical facilities.<br><b>Conclusion:</b> The rapid response-type doctor car is effective even in remote severe trauma cases.