Effect of Noninvasive Airway Management of Comatose Patients With Acute Poisoning: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Tracheal intubation is recommended for coma patients and those with severe brain injury, but its use in patients with decreased levels of consciousness from acute poisoning is uncertain. Objective: To determine the effect of intubation withholding vs routine practice on clinical outcomes of comatose patients with acute poisoning and a Glasgow Coma Scale score less than 9. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a multicenter, randomized trial conducted in 20 emergency departments and 1 intensive care unit (ICU) that included comatose patients with suspected acute poisoning and a Glasgow Coma Scale score less than 9 in France between May 16, 2021, and April 12, 2023, and followed up until May 12, 2023. Intervention: Patients were randomized to undergo conservative airway strategy of intubation withholding vs routine practice. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was a hierarchical composite end point of in-hospital death, length of ICU stay, and length of hospital stay. Key secondary outcomes included adverse events resulting from intubation as well as pneumonia within 48 hours. Results: Among the 225 included patients (mean age, 33 years; 38% female), 116 were in the intervention group and 109 in the control group, with respective proportions of intubations of 16% and 58%. No patients died during the in-hospital stay. There was a significant clinical benefit for the primary end point in the intervention group, with a win ratio of 1.85 (95% CI, 1.33 to 2.58). In the intervention group, there was a lower proportion with any adverse event (6% vs 14.7%; absolute risk difference, 8.6% [95% CI, -16.6% to -0.7%]) compared with the control group, and pneumonia occurred in 8 (6.9%) and 16 (14.7%) patients, respectively (absolute risk difference, -7.8% [95% CI, -15.9% to 0.3%]). Conclusions and Relevance: Among comatose patients with suspected acute poisoning, a conservative strategy of withholding intubation was associated with a greater clinical benefit for the composite end point of in-hospital death, length of ICU stay, and length of hospital stay. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04653597.

Management of patients suffering from mild traumatic brain injury 2023.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a multidisciplinary French reference that addresses initial pre- and in-hospital management of a mild traumatic brain injury patient. DESIGN: A panel of 22 experts was formed on request from the French Society of Emergency Medicine (SFMU) and the French Society of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine (SFAR). A policy of declaration and monitoring of links of interest was applied and respected throughout the process of producing the guidelines. Similarly, no funding was received from any company marketing a health product (drug or medical device). The expert panel had to respect and follow the Grade® (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methodology to evaluate the quality of the evidence on which the recommendations were based. Given the impossibility of obtaining a high level of evidence for most of the recommendations, it was decided to adopt a "Recommendations for Professional Practice" (RPP) format, rather than a Formalized Expert Recommendation (FER) format, and to formulate the recommendations using the terminology of the SFMU and SFAR Guidelines. METHODS: Three fields were defined: 1) pre-hospital assessment, 2) emergency room management, and 3) emergency room discharge modalities. The group assessed 11 questions related to mild traumatic brain injury. Each question was formulated using a PICO (Patients Intervention Comparison Outcome) format. RESULTS: The experts' synthesis work and the application of the GRADE® method resulted in the formulation of 14 recommendations. After two rounds of rating, strong agreement was obtained for all recommendations. For one question, no recommendation could be made. CONCLUSION: There was strong agreement among the experts on important, transdisciplinary recommendations, the purpose of which is to improve management practices for patients with mild head injury.

Guidelines for the choice of intravenous fluids for vascular filling in critically ill patients, 2021.

PURPOSE: To provide recommendations for the appropriate choice of fluid therapy for resuscitation of critically ill patients. DESIGN: A consensus committee of 24 experts from the French Society of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine (Société française d'anesthésie et de réanimation, SFAR) and the French Society of Emergency Medicine (Société française de médecine d'urgence, SFMU) was convened. A formal conflict-of-interest policy was developed at the onset of the process and enforced throughout. The entire guideline elaboration process was conducted independently of any industry funding. The authors were advised to follow the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system to guide their assessment of quality of evidence. The potential drawbacks of making strong recommendations in the presence of low-quality evidence were emphasised. Some recommendations were left ungraded. METHODS: Four fields were defined: patients with sepsis or septic shock, patients with haemorrhagic shock, patients with acute brain failure, and patients during the peripartum period. For each field, the panel focused on two questions: (1) Does the use of colloids, as compared to crystalloids, reduce morbidity and mortality, and (2) Does the use of some specific crystalloids effectively reduce morbidity and mortality. Population, intervention, comparison, and outcomes (PICO) questions were reviewed and updated as needed, and evidence profiles were generated. The analysis of the literature and the recommendations were then conducted according to the GRADE methodology. RESULTS: The SFAR/SFMU guideline panel provided nine statements on the appropriate choice of fluid therapy for resuscitation of critically ill patients. After two rounds of rating and various amendments, strong agreement was reached for 100% of the recommendations. Out of these recommendations, two have a high level of evidence (Grade 1 +/-), six have a moderate level of evidence (Grade 2 +/-), and one is based on expert opinion. Finally, no recommendation was formulated for two questions. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial agreement among experts has been obtained to provide a sizable number of recommendations aimed at optimising the choice of fluid therapy for resuscitation of critically ill patients.

Predictors of Risk Stratification and Value of Point-of-Care of High-Sensitivity Cardiac Troponin-I in EMS Management of Non-ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A Retrospective Study.

INTRODUCTION: The European Society of Cardiology (ESC) 2020 guidelines propose an algorithm for in-hospital management of non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) based on risk stratification according to clinical, electrocardiographic, and biological data. However, out-of-hospital management is not codified. STUDY OBJECTIVE: The objective of the present study was to evaluate the role of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin-I in out-of-hospital management of NSTEMI by Emergency Medical Services (EMS). METHODS: This monocentric, retrospective, observational study analyzed the files of all patients having received a troponin assay in the EMS of Beaujon University Hospital, AP-HP (Paris region, France) from January 1, 2020 through December 31, 2020. Patients were classified as low risk, high risk, or very high risk according to the ESC 2020 algorithm at the time of their hospital treatment. The relationship between troponin in point-of-care and risk level according to time to onset of pain was analyzed using logistic regression. A search for predictors of risk level was performed using multivariate analysis. A P value <.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: Out of 309 patients in the file, 233 were included. Men were 61% and the median age was 63 years. A positive troponin assay was associated with high-risk or very high-risk stratification regardless of the time to onset of pain (P <.0001). Predictive factors for being classified as high or very high risk in hospital were: a history of atrial fibrillation (P = .03), electrocardiogram (ECG) modifications such as negative T wave or ST-segment depression (P <.0001), and positive troponin (P <.0001). CONCLUSION: The use of point-of-care troponin in EMS, combined with clinical and electrical criteria, allows risk stratification of NSTEMI patients from the prehospital management stage and optimization of referral to an appropriate care pathway. Patients classified as low risk should be referred to the emergency department (ED) and patients classified as high risk or very high risk to the cardiac intensive care unit or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) center.