Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
2.
Echocardiography ; 38(5): 798-804, 2021 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1132888

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic has presented countless new challenges for healthcare providers including the challenge of differentiating COVID-19 infection from other diseases. COVID-19 infection and acute endocarditis may present similarly, both with shortness of breath and vital sign abnormalities, yet they require very different treatments. Here, we present two cases in which life-threatening acute endocarditis was initially misdiagnosed as COVID-19 infection during the height of the pandemic in New York City. The first was a case of Klebsiella pneumoniae mitral valve endocarditis leading to papillary muscle rupture and severe mitral regurgitation, and the second a case of Streptococcus mitis aortic valve endocarditis with heart failure due to severe aortic regurgitation. These cases highlight the importance of careful clinical reasoning and demonstrate how cognitive errors may impact clinical reasoning. They also underscore the limitations of real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) for SARS-CoV-2 testing and illustrate the ways in which difficulty interpreting results may also influence clinical reasoning. Accurate diagnosis of acute endocarditis is critical given that surgical intervention can be lifesaving in unstable patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Endocarditis, Bacterial , Endocarditis , Heart Valve Prosthesis , Aortic Valve , COVID-19 Testing , Diagnostic Errors , Endocarditis, Bacterial/diagnosis , Humans , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
3.
Echocardiography ; 38(3): 446-449, 2021 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1084702

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: The coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) led to a large influx of critically ill patients and altered echocardiography laboratory workflow. We developed a point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) first approach to patients requiring echocardiography and describe our workflow and findings. METHODS: We performed a single-center retrospective analysis of all POCUS studies performed on critically ill patients with COVID-19. Sonography was performed by intensivists, uploaded and archived, and rapidly reviewed by echocardiographers. We evaluated each study based on the number of views obtained. Additionally, we provide a description of the workflow during the COVID-19 surge at a tertiary care hospital in New York City. RESULTS: Fifty patients had POCUS studies performed by intensivists and reviewed by echocardiographers obviating the need for sonographer-performed studies. Of the 48 cardiac POCUS studies, 17% of patients had 4 of 4 standard views available while 53% had 3 of 4 standard views. The parasternal long-axis view was obtained on 81%, subxiphoid view on 79%, apical 4-chamber view on 71%, and parasternal short-axis view on 63% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Our POCUS workflow allowed intensivists to perform cardiac sonography for rapid bedside diagnosis of pathology with immediate interpretation performed by echocardiographers. At least 3 views were obtained in the majority of cases.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Critical Illness , Echocardiography/methods , Heart Diseases/diagnosis , Pandemics , Point-of-Care Testing/organization & administration , Comorbidity , Heart Diseases/epidemiology , Humans , Retrospective Studies
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL