The E/e' Ratio: As "Critical" As the Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction?

Ascertainment of the left ventricular ejection fraction is the primary reason for ordering echocardiography in the acute care setting; however, this parameter does not provide information regarding a patient's volume status. As such, it cannot be reliably used to inform decisions regarding intravenous fluid resuscitation or diuresis, particularly in undifferentiated dyspnea and hypotension. This is relevant given a national quality improvement exhortation to provide aggressive fluid resuscitation as part of a "sepsis bundle." This initiative must be tempered by the well-established increase in hospital mortality from providing intravenous fluid to patients with unrecognized heart failure, which may occur if sepsis is misdiagnosed. We describe herein, what is to our knowledge, the first description of a critically elevated Doppler ratio of mitral inflow peak E-wave velocity to the mean mitral annular velocity as a harbinger of sudden death from pulmonary edema in a patient treated with aggressive intravenous fluids as part of the "sepsis bundle." This is utilized as a springboard for proposing a clinical algorithm focused on expedited echocardiography. It emphasized the potential value of advancing markedly the diastolic assessment of filling pressure (ratio of mitral inflow peak E-wave velocity to the mean mitral annular velocity) in the acute care setting to a level of import comparable to the left ventricular ejection fraction.

TENS relieves acute posttraumatic hip pain during emergency transport.

BACKGROUND: In Central Europe, ambulances for patients suffering from pain caused by nonlife-threatening trauma, such as hip fractures are staffed by medical personnel (medics) without physicians. Thus, there is an urgent need for nonpharmacological interventions that can be applied during the transport by basic life-support (BLS) medical personnel. METHODS: In all, 101 patients were screened for participation in this randomized placebo-controlled double-blind study, and randomly assigned to two groups (verum and sham transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation [TENS]). First, medic A recorded all baseline parameters and measurements, then medic B performed TENS in absence of medic A. At the end of transportation, medic A performed data collection. Each patient was asked to grade his/her pain and anxiety level on visual analog scales (VAS, 0 to 100 mm). RESULTS: From 101 screened patients fulfilling the entry criteria, 29 declined consent and 9 had to be excluded from the analysis because of their final diagnosis. Therefore, the data from 30 patients (group 1, verum TENS) as well as from 33 patients (group 2 [control], sham TENS) were analyzed. No significant differences in potentially influencing factors were found before treatment. Pain scores upon arrival at the hospital differed significantly between group 1 and group 2 (p < 0.01). In group 1, pain reduction was observed between departure from the site of emergency and arrival at the hospital (VAS: 89 +/- 9 to 59 +/- 6 mm), whereas pain scores remained nearly unchanged in group 2 (VAS: 86 +/- 12 to 79 +/- 11 mm). CONCLUSION: Our findings show that TENS is a valuable and fast-acting pain treatment under the difficult circumstances of "out-of-hospital rescue". Because of its lack of side effects, it could also be a valuable tool in the hospital.

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation reduces acute low back pain during emergency transport.

BACKGROUND: Patients with acute low back pain may require emergency transport because of pain and immobilization. Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is a nonpharmaceutical therapy for patients with low back pain. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of paramedic-administered TENS in patients with acute low back pain during emergency transport. METHODS: This was a prospective, randomized study involving 74 patients transported to hospital. The patients were randomly assigned to two groups: group 1 (n = 36) was treated with true TENS, while group 2 (n = 36) was treated with sham TENS. The authors recorded pain and anxiety as the main outcome variables using a visual analog scale (VAS). RESULTS: The authors recorded a significant (p < 0.01) pain reduction (mean +/- standard deviation) during transport in group 1 (79.2 +/- 6.5 mm VAS to 48.9 +/- 8.2 mm VAS), whereas pain scores remained unchanged in group 2 (75.9 +/- 16.4 mm VAS and 77.1 +/- 11.2 mm VAS). Similarly, the scores for anxiety were significantly reduced (p < 0.01) in group 1 (81.7 +/- 7.9 mm VAS to 69.2 +/- 12.1 mm VAS) after treatment. No significant change was noted (84.5 +/- 5.8 mm VAS and 83.5 +/- 8.9 mm VAS, respectively) in group 2. CONCLUSIONS: TENS was found to be effective and rapid in reducing pain during emergency transport of patients with acute low back pain and should be considered due to its ease of use and lack of side effects in the study population.

Incidence of normal values of natriuretic peptides in patients with chronic heart failure and impact on survival: a direct comparison of N-terminal atrial natriuretic peptide, N-terminal brain natriuretic peptide and brain natriuretic peptide.

AIMS: N-ANP, N-BNP and BNP are proven to be excellent markers for diagnosis and the prediction of outcome in heart failure patients. Published studies on this subject differ in respect of their design and are therefore difficult to compare. The EuroHeart Failure Survey was undertaken to evaluate the drug prescription rate; the cohort of this survey best reflects clinical practice. The purpose of the present study was to compare the three hormones in clinical practice for the purpose of diagnosis and the prediction of outcome. Attention was focused on patients with normal values and the implications of these on survival. METHODS AND RESULTS: Of 341 patients recruited in the Austrian centers of the survey, blood samples for the determination of N-ANP, N-BNP and BNP were taken from 112 patients. Mortality within the observation period was defined as the endpoint. Normal levels of the hormones were found in 5% of cases for N-ANP, 25% for N-BNP and 30% for BNP. The mortality of patients with normal values was low (0%, 3% and 6%, respectively) and occurred late (after more than 23 months). Above-median levels of all three hormones resulted in a comparable mortality (51% survival for N-ANP, 50% for BNP and 49% for N-BNP). CONCLUSIONS: In a clinical setting, the risk stratification for outcome is similar for N-ANP, N-BNP and BNP. More importantly, all hormones are reliable parameters to diagnose CHF using normal values as a cut-point. However, N-ANP appears to be more sensitive than BNP or N-BNP.