The Last Straw: Trends in Straw-Related Emergency Department Visits.

OBJECTIVES: With the recent societal push for eco-sustainability, there has been an increase in the prevalence of reusable utensils, particularly multiuse straws. This study is the first to investigate the epidemiology of plastic, glass, and metal straw-related injuries (SRIs) presenting to the emergency department (ED). METHODS: The National Electronic Injury Surveillance System database was examined for SRIs from January 2012 through December 2021. Cases were stratified by sex, age, diagnosis, mechanism of injury, and straw material to monitor epidemiological patterns. RESULTS: A total of 1,174 SRIs presented to the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System EDs from January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2021. The majority of injuries occurred among males (55.9%) aged 0-3 years old (43.8%). Injuries caused by reusable straws were significantly more common in patients 3 years old or younger (P < 0.001). Injuries most commonly affect the mouth (45.4%), eyes (22%), and internal structures (13.6%). Lacerations and oral injuries were significantly more common among reusable straw materials (P < 0.001). A 46.5% increase in injuries was noted from 2012 to 2021. The most common mechanism of injury was poking injury (53.5%), followed by stationary falls (19.4%), foreign body (18.7%), running and falling (5.9%), and other (2.4%). Of these cases, 46.3% of injuries were due to the improper use of straws. Metal straw injuries increased 12.8% over the study period. CONCLUSIONS: Although most injuries occurred as accidental poking while drinking, nearly half of all injuries were sustained while using straws in an off-label manner. Ensuring the proper use of straws and monitoring children when using a straw may help to decrease the incidence of SRI. Among the options for environmentally friendly straw materials, metal straws pose the greatest risk for injuries requiring ED presentation. Thus, their use should be avoided in the pediatric population.

A Five-Year Overview of Bicycle Injuries in the United States Between the Years 2017 and 2021.

Introduction This study investigates the changes in bicycle-related injury rates between 2017 and 2021. We focus specifically on changes in age demographics, and the most common diagnoses and body parts injured. Methods We queried the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System (NEISS) for injuries associated with bicycles from 2017 to 2021. Chi-square analysis was used to evaluate trends in injuries vs. time for the entire sample, age groups in five-year increments, and the proportion of injury types by diagnosis and body part. Results The highest annual injury rate (12,800 counts) occurred in 2020, coinciding with the COVID-19 safer-at-home order. Pediatric patients continue to make up the majority of injured cyclists (48% of patients are younger than 19 years), but their percentage is decreasing (zero to four years (-13%, p < 0.005), five to nine years (-17%, p < 0.005), 10-14 years (-5%, p < 0.005), 20-24 years (-16%, p < 0.005), 25-29 years (-2%, p < 0.005), and 50-54 years (-14%, p < 0.005)) and mirrored by an increase in the proportion of older injured cyclists (40-44 years (+26%, p < 0.005), 60-64 years (+44%, p < 0.005), 65-69 years (+69%, p < 0.005), and 70+ years (+57%, p < 0.005)). The past five years saw an increase in injuries associated with higher impact forces and the potential for more severe morbidity and mortality, such as internal organ injuries (+13%, p < 0.01). The incidence of concussions, however, has not changed significantly. The extremities are the most commonly injured body parts (upper and lower arm, elbow, wrist, hand, fingers, upper and lower leg, knee, ankle, foot, and toe = 47% total) and continue to increase in frequency (lower arm (+2%, p < 0.005), lower leg (+3%, p < 0.01), upper arm (+18%, p < 0.005), and hand (+11%, p < 0.05)), while facial injuries are becoming less common (-3%, p < 0.05), and head injuries have not experienced a significant change of incidence. Conclusion Although there was an increase in bicycle-related injuries during the COVID-19 safer-at-home order, numbers have since returned to pre-COVID-19 levels. Other changes in bicycle injury demographics and mechanisms, such as a rise in older adult cyclists and high-force mechanism injuries, however, call for a re-evaluation of preventive and treatment priorities.

Impact of Trauma Verification Level on Management and Outcomes of Combined Traumatic Brain and Solid Organ Injuries: An NTDB Retrospective Review.

BACKGROUND: Level-I and level-II trauma centers are required to offer equivalent resources since "The Orange Book." This study evaluates differences between level-I and level-II management of solid organ injury (SOI) with traumatic brain injury (TBI). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of the National Trauma Data Banks from 2013 to 2021 of adult (≥18 years), blunt trauma patients with both TBI and SOI treated at level-I or level-II trauma centers. RESULTS: 48,479 TBI and SOI patients were identified, 32,611 (67.3%) at level-I centers. Unadjusted incidence of laparotomy was higher at level I (14.5% vs 11.7%, P < 0.001), and angiography rates were similar (3.3% vs 3.4%, P 0.717). Sub-group analysis of stable patients (SBP ≥100) showed an increase in nonoperative management at level II (87.3% vs 88.7%, P < 0.001) and decrease in laparotomy (9.9% vs 8.3%, P < 0.001). On logistic regression (LR), severe TBI, high-grade SOI, and level I trauma status were predictors of laparotomy. Logistic regression showed mild/moderate TBI with high-grade SOI and level II were associated with use of angiography. Unadjusted mortality rates were slightly different (14.8% vs 13.4%, P < 0.001), but there was no association with trauma level on LR. DISCUSSION: Nonoperative management was seen more at level-II centers with laparotomy at level I. Subgroup analysis showed no difference in mortality in trauma levels. Matched patients for level I and II showed no statistical difference in management. Patients were treated similarly at both levels with similar outcomes and mortality.

Pediatric Trauma During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A 3-year Retrospective Analysis.

The Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has significantly impacted the volume and types of trauma patients encountered. We performed a retrospective analysis of pediatric trauma patients <17 years old presenting within a large US health care system from 2019 to 2021. Demographics, trauma volume, injury severity, mechanism of injury, and outcomes were compared. A total of 16 966 patients, from 88 hospitals over 18 states, were included in our analysis. Pediatric traumas decreased from 2019 to 2020 and 2021. The injury severity scores (ISSs) increased from 2019 to 2020 and 2019 to 2021. Compared with 2019, more gun-related traumas occurred in both 2020 and 2021, whereas motor vehicle collisions decreased. There were additional changes in bicycle, assault, auto versus pedestrian (AVP), playground, and sports injuries. The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted the volume, injury severity, and mechanism of injury of the pediatric trauma population.

Rectal Foreign Bodies: A 10-Year Review of the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System.

Introduction Rectal foreign bodies may result in significant morbidity, potentially necessitating surgical intervention and ostomy creation. The sensitive nature of the diagnosis may lead to inaccurate patient history and possible delay in diagnosis. Currently, there is a paucity of large national studies addressing this diagnosis. Therefore, we present national data describing the demographics and incidence of patients presenting with rectal foreign bodies. Methods The National Electronic Injury Surveillance System (NEISS) was utilized to collect data regarding rectal foreign bodies. Ten years of data were collected from 2012 to 2021. Inclusion criteria focused on the diagnosis of "foreign body" coupled with pelvic and lower torso injuries. Exclusion criteria encompassed patients without a rectal foreign body clearly identified in the narrative. Patients were compared based on disposition as low severity (treated/examined and released or left without being seen) or high severity (treated and admitted/hospitalized, held for observation, or transferred to another facility). General descriptive and inferential analyses were performed regarding demographics and dispositions. Results A total of 1,806 emergency department (ED) visits were identified for inclusion. Patients ranged in age from 0 to 93 years, with a mean age of 30 years. The largest age group identified was 11-15 and 21-25 years. Most patients were male (64.6%) and white (47.1%). The most common foreign bodies were massage devices and vibrators (22.7%), jewelry (8.1%), pens and pencils (4.4%), fishing gears (activity, apparel, or equipment) (3.7%), and nonglass bottles or jars (2.6%). Patients requiring admission, observation, or transfer differed from those patients that were discharged from the ED by age, sex, race, and product involved. Discussion Rectal foreign bodies are a rare diagnosis with a growing incidence. Though the most common objects are massage devices and vibrators consistent with sexual stimulation devices, there are limited product guidelines for safe use. Further studies to help identify at-risk persons, safety precautions, and manufacturing guidelines may help prevent potential morbidity associated with rectal foreign bodies.

Epidemiology of Rugby-Related Injuries Presenting to the Emergency Department: A 10-Year Review.

Background Rugby is a popular contact sport played with little to no protective clothing. There exist few comprehensive studies investigating emergency department (ED) visit patterns for rugby-related injuries.We hypothesize that male athletes remain the most common patient demographic to present to the ED with rugby-related injuries and that the number of patients diagnosed with soft tissue injuries such as sprains and strains decreased during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methodology The National Electronic Injury Surveillance System database was examined for rugby injuries from January 2012 through December 2021. Cases were stratified by sex, age, and injury type to monitor epidemiological patterns. This is a descriptive epidemiology study. Level of evidence III. Results A total of 2,896 individuals with rugby-related ED visits were identified. ED patients were most common among males (73.9%), Caucasians (45.3%), and in the 15-19-year-old age range (44.9%). Injuries most commonly affected the upper body, specifically the head (23.1%), face (13.8%), and shoulder (12.4%) with fractures and sprains comprising 22.3% and 18.5% of ED diagnoses, respectively. Concussions were the most frequent injury to any one body part (11.2%). During the COVID-19 pandemic, ED patients with rugby-related injuries were significantly more likely to be males presenting with lacerations or hemorrhages. ED visits for sprains and strains significantly decreased in the peri-COVID-19 period. Conclusions Annual ED visits due to rugby injuries are declining. The head and neck are the most common sites of injuries. Decreased presentation to the ED during the COVID-19 pandemic may raise concern for the potential for untreated injuries. Physicians should anticipate the presence of chronic sports-related injuries when evaluating future patients.

The epidemiology of firework-related injuries in the US, 2012-2022.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to examine the epidemiology of firework-related injuries within a national population between 2012 and 2022, including the severity of injury by year, patient demographics, body region injured, firework type, and diagnosis category of injury. METHODS: Data were collected from the Consumer Product Safety Commission's National Electronic Injury Surveillance System, which is a representative nationwide database that collects data on consumer product-related injuries occurring in the US. Injury rates were calculated based on patient age, sex, body region injured, firework type, and diagnosis category. RESULTS: A total of 3219 injuries, representing an estimated 122,912 firework-related injuries, were treated in emergency departments within the US from 2012 to 2022. The overall incidence rate of firework-related injuries in the study rose by over 17% from 2012 [2.61 cases per 100,000 people (95% CI 2.03-3.20)] to 2022 and [3.05 cases per 100,000 people (95% CI 2.29-3.80)]. The rate of injuries was highest in adolescents and young adults (age 20-24; 7.13 cases per 100,000 people). Men experienced firework injuries at more than double the rate of women (4.90 versus 2.25 cases per 100,000 people). The upper extremities (41.62%), head/neck (36.40%), and lower extremities (13.78%) were the most commonly injured regions. Over 20% of cases in patients older than 20 were significant injuries requiring hospitalization. Aerial devices (32.11%) and illegal fireworks (21.05%) caused the highest rates of significant injury of any firework type. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of firework-related injuries has risen over the past decade. Injuries remain the most common among adolescents and young adults. In addition, significant injuries requiring hospitalization occur most often during aerial and illegal firework use. Further targeted sale restrictions, distribution, and manufacturing regulations for high-risk fireworks are required to reduce the incidence of significant injury.

Unintentional Drownings in Pediatric Populations: Injury Prevention in the Post-COVID-19 Era.

Unintentional injuries are one of the leading causes of death in Americans. A large proportion of these deaths are attributable to accidental drownings and falls, both of which oftentimes take place in or around swimming pools and swimming pool-related apparatuses such as diving boards. The American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP) has reported drowning incidents as the most common injury-related cause of death in children ages one to four years. Although the AAFP has outlined steps to take to prevent drownings, there has not been a current large-scale study illustrating the effectiveness of these strategies with regard to their effect on the prevalence of swimming pool drowning cases in the last 10 years. Thus, we aim to utilize the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System (NEISS) database to uncover these rates, which can ultimately help aid in the reevaluation of current recommended guidelines.

Traumatic Amputations Treated in US Emergency Departments: A Review of the NEISS Database.

BACKGROUND: Trauma is the second most common cause of limb loss in the United States (US), second only to vascular disease. The aim of this study was to evaluate the demographics and commercial products associated with traumatic amputations in the United States. METHODS: The National Electronic Injury Surveillance System (NEISS) database was analyzed from 2012 to 2021 to identify patients presenting to the Emergency Department (ED) with the diagnosis of amputation. Additional variables included patient demographics, body part amputated, commercial products associated with amputation, and ED treatment disposition. RESULTS: A total of 7323 patients diagnosed with amputation were identified in the NEISS database. Amputations were most frequent in the 0-5 years age group, followed by 51-55 years. More males than females suffered an amputation during the study period (77% vs 22%). Most patients were Caucasian. Fingers were most frequently amputated (91%), followed by toes (5%). Most injuries occurred in the home (56%). The top commercial product behind these traumatic amputations was doors (18%), followed by bench or table saws (14%) and power lawn mowers (6%). Over 70% of patients were able to be treated and released from the ED, while 22% required hospitalization and 5% were transferred to another facility. DISCUSSION: Traumatic amputations can cause significant injuries. A better understanding of the incidence and mechanisms behind traumatic amputations may help with injury prevention. Pediatric patients had a high incidence of traumatic amputations, which warrants further research and dedication to injury prevention in this vulnerable group.

Children ages one to four are disproportionally affected by chemical burns in a cross-sectional analysis of NEISS 2012-2021.

BACKGROUND: Household cleaning and personal care products (HC&PCPs) are irreplaceable in most daily routines. However, data are sparse on chemical burns caused by HC&PCPs. METHODS: We queried the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System (NEISS) from 2012 to 2021 to characterize chemical burns caused by HC&PCPs as well as the most common causative categories of HC&PCPs responsible for chemical burns. RESULTS: We found 2729 total emergency department (ED) visits due to chemical burn injuries within the years 2012-2021 due to HC&PCPs. Chemical burns disproportionally affect children ages four and under, accounting for 36.4% of all patients. Within this subpopulation, boys were more frequently affected by chemical burns and the eyes were the most affected area. The most common HC&PCPs involved in chemical burns in individuals ages one to four were laundry soaps and detergents (22.0%) and bleaches (21.3%). CONCLUSION: Children ages four and under are disproportionately affected by chemical burns due to non-intentional exposure of HC&PCPs, with laundry detergents and bleaches being the most common causative agents. Adequate storage of all HC&PCPs and improved parental supervision are paramount in preventing chemical burns in this age group.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Trauma Encounters.

OBJECTIVES: The Coronavirus Disease 2019 pandemic has affected the health care system significantly. We compare 2019 to 2020 to evaluate how trauma encounters has changed during the pandemic. METHODS: Retrospective analysis using a large US health care system to compare trauma demographics, volumes, mechanisms of injury, and outcomes. Statistical analysis was used to evaluate for significant differences comparing 2019 to 2020. RESULTS: Data was collected from 88 hospitals across 18 states. 169 892 patients were included in the study. There were 6.3% fewer trauma patient encounters in 2020 compared to 2019. Mechanism of injury was significantly different between 2019 and 2020 with less blunt injuries (89.64% vs. 88.39%, P < .001), more burn injuries (1.84% vs. 2.00%, P = .021), and more penetrating injuries (8.58% vs. 9.75%, P < .001). Compared to 2019, patients in 2020 had higher mortality (2.62% vs. 2.88%, P < .001), and longer hospital LOS (3.92 ± 6.90 vs. 4.06 ± 6.56, P < .001). CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly affected trauma patient demographics, LOS, mechanism of injury, and mortality.

A Contemporary Analysis of the Effect of Trauma Center Verification Level on Mortality in Severe Injury.

BACKGROUND: Literature demonstrates increased mortality for the severely injured at a Level II vs. Level I center. Our objective is to reevaluate the impact of trauma center verification level on mortality for patients with an Injury Severity Score (ISS) > 15 utilizing more contemporary data. We hypothesize that there would be no mortality discrepancy. STUDY DESIGN: Utilizing the ACS Trauma Quality Program Participant Use File admission year 2017, we identified severely injured (ISS >15) adult (age >15 years) patients treated at an ACS-verified Level I or Level II center. We excluded patients who underwent interfacility transfer. Logistic regression was performed to determine adjusted associations with mortality. RESULTS: There were 63 518 patients included, where 43 680 (68.8%) were treated at a Level I center and 19 838 (31.2%) at a Level II. Male gender (70.1%) and blunt injuries (92.0%) predominated. Level I admissions had a higher mean ISS [23.8 (±8.5) vs. 22.9 (±7.8), <.001], while Level II patients were older [mean age (y) 52.3 (±21.6) vs. 48.6 (±21.0), <.001] with multiple comorbidities (37.7% vs. 34.9%, <.001). Adjusted mortality between Level I and II centers was similar (12.0% vs. 11.8%, .570). CONCLUSIONS: Despite previous findings, mortality outcomes are similar for severely injured patients treated at a Level I vs. Level II center. We theorize that this relates to mandated Level II resourcing as defined by an updated American College of Surgeons verification process.

Management of Blunt Traumatic Abdominal Wall Hernias: An Analysis of the National Trauma Data Bank.

BACKGROUND: Blunt traumatic abdominal wall hernias (TAWH) are uncommon injuries with variable presentation and unstandardized management. Few national systematic descriptive studies have been conducted about TAWH. We present a retrospective descriptive study utilizing the National Trauma Data Bank (NTDB) to better characterize risk factors associated with TAWH and management practices. METHODS: The NTDB (years 2016-2019) was examined for adult blunt trauma patients who had TAWH. Data included demographics, trauma-specific variables, management strategies, and outcome measures. Descriptive statistics were performed by univariate analysis. RESULTS: 2 871 367 adult blunt trauma patients were identified in the NTDB dataset. 206 had abdominal wall hernias (<.01%). Compared with the overall blunt trauma cohort, patients with TAWH had higher body mass index (BMI) and Injury Severity Scores (ISS), were more likely to be male, and had a higher mortality rate. 44 patients (21%) underwent operative management during their initial admission. Surgically managed patients were younger, had higher ISS and BMI, and were more likely to have concomitant intra-abdominal injuries. The few patients who had laparoscopic surgery had significantly higher BMI. Patients managed operatively had longer hospital and ICU lengths of stay and increased incidence of medical complications. CONCLUSIONS: TAWH is an uncommon complication of blunt abdominal trauma, associated with higher BMI, ISS, and increased mortality. Initial operative management was pursued in 21% of cases, more often in younger, more severely injured patients with other intra-abdominal injuries. Evidence-based guidelines, based on multicenter prospective studies with longer follow-up, should be developed for management of these unique injuries.

Effect of Resident Involvement on Trauma Patient Outcomes: A Single-Institution Review.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to examine the mortality difference and other outcome measures amongst trauma patients with residents involved in the initial management versus those that were managed by attending physicians only without resident involvement. DESIGN: Retrospective review. Chi-square, Fisher's tests were used to analyze the outcomes, diagnostics, and interventions using the presence of residents in the initial care of patients as an independent variable. Linear and logistic regression were used to estimate adjusted outcomes. SETTING: Riverside Community Hospital, Riverside California (State-designated level I trauma center) PARTICIPANTS: Data on all trauma patients ≥18 years old that were admitted between July 1, 2018 and June 30, 2020 was collected retrospectively (total 2644 trauma patients). Trauma patients that were transferred from outside facilities were excluded from the study. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in mortality associated with resident involvement in both unadjusted and adjusted analysis. Patients treated by residents, however, had more comorbidities (higher CCI) and were more severely injured (higher ISS). On adjusted analysis, higher ISS was independently associated with resident presence. There was also a statistically significant increase in the use of diagnostic studies and therapeutic interventions in the resident-present group. CONCLUSIONS: Involvement of residents in the initial management of our trauma patient population was associated with no difference in overall mortality or morbidity, despite higher injury severity in the resident treated patient group.

Low Prevalence but High Impact of COVID-19 Positive Status in Adult Trauma Patients: A Multi-institutional Analysis of 28 904 Patients.

BACKGROUND: Few large investigations have addressed the prevalence of COVID-19 infection among trauma patients and impact on providers. The purpose of this study was to quantify the prevalence of COVID-19 infection among trauma patients by timing of diagnosis, assess nosocomial exposure risk, and evaluate the impact of COVID-19 positive status on morbidity and mortality. METHODS: Registry data from adults admitted 4/1/2020-10/31/2020 from 46 level I/II trauma centers were grouped by: timing of first positive status (Day 1, Day 2-6, or Day ≥ 7); overall Positive/Negative status; or Unknown if test results were unavailable. Groups were compared on outcomes (Trauma Quality Improvement Program complications) and mortality using univariate analysis and adjusted logistic regression. RESULTS: There were 28 904 patients (60.7% male, mean age: 56.4, mean injury severity score: 10.5). Of 13 274 (46%) patients with known COVID-19 status, 266 (2%) were Positive Day 1, 119 (1%) Days 2-6, 33 (.2%) Day ≥ 7, and 12 856 (97%) tested Negative. COVID-19 Positive patients had significantly worse outcomes compared to Negative; unadjusted comparisons showed longer hospital length of stay (10.98 vs 7.47;P < .05), higher rates of intensive care unit (57.7% vs 45.7%; P < .05) and ventilation use (22.5% vs 16.9%; P < .05). Adjusted comparisons showed higher rates of acute respiratory distress syndrome (1.7% vs .4%; P < .05) and death (8.1% vs 3.4%; P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: This multicenter study conducted during the early pandemic period revealed few trauma patients tested COVID-19 positive, suggesting relatively low exposure risk to care providers. COVID-19 positive status was associated with significantly higher mortality and specific morbidity. Further analysis is needed with consideration for care guidelines specific to COVID-19 positive trauma patients as the pandemic continues.

Bradyarrhythmia After Remdesivir Administration in SARS-CoV-2: A Review of Literature and Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology.

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has required timely and informed decisions about treatment recommendations for clinical practice. One such drug used for the treatment of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection is remdesivir (RDV), and several cardiac side effects have been reported including bradyarrhythmia (e.g., transient sinus bradycardia, symptomatic sinus bradycardia, complete atrioventricular (AV) block). The current study aimed to explore the association between RDV treatment for SARS-CoV-2 infection and the risk of bradyarrhythmia by presenting a review and meta-analysis of available published studies. Methods: We presented a review of published literature and meta-analysis of observational studies (MOOSE). A narrative summary of RDV and bradyarrhythmia in COVID-19 infection and pooled analysis of observational studies that meet inclusion criteria was included. Studies included were published between January 2020 and December 2021 (identified through PubMed and ScienceDirect) and examined the association between treatment with RDV in SARS-CoV-2 infection and the risk of bradyarrhythmia. Results: Three studies (two retrospective cohort studies and one prospective cohort study) met inclusion criteria for pooled meta-analysis of bradyarrhythmia and RDV therapy in COVID-19 patients. Treatment with RDV was associated with increased risk of sinus bradycardia when compared to controls (odds ratio 3.27 (95% confidence interval 1.90 - 5.63)). In the pooled analysis, the incidence of bradycardia in those that received RDV was 34.07% vs. 18.13% among controls. Thirteen case reports, three case series, and three disproportionality analyses were identified in review of the literature. Conclusion: Data from real-world observational studies suggest that treating COVID-19 patients with RDV may predispose the development of bradyarrhythmia. The importance of this observation is of uncertain clinical significance as some observational studies have reported more favorable outcomes among patients who experience bradycardia after RDV therapy. The current study is limited by the small number of studies that could be meaningfully pooled and more well-designed cohort studies are needed to explore this association.

Non-ischemic Painful Intermittent Left Bundle Branch Block With Infra-Hisian Block Treated Successfully With Biventricular Pacemaker: A Case Report and Literature Review.

Non-ischemic painful left bundle branch block (LBBB) is defined as chest pain that occurs simultaneously with the appearance of left bundle branch block and resolves with the disappearance of the left bundle branch block in patients without evidence of myocardial ischemia. The underlying mechanism of this rare clinical occurrence has not been fully understood, but it has been proposed that it results from ventricular dyssynchrony. In this case report, we present a 65-year-old male with non-ischemic chest pain who was found to have intermittent left bundle branch block (ILBBB) with infra-Hisian conduction delay, treated successfully with a biventricular pacemaker. After excluding the presence of angiographic coronary artery disease, an electrophysiology study was conducted to direct the management and investigate other causes of chest pain. The present study highlights the importance of obtaining electrophysiology studies in patients with painful left bundle branch block with no angiographic evidence of coronary artery disease to diagnose this uncommon syndrome.

Corrected QT Interval Prolongation, Elevated Troponin, and Mortality in Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients.

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection has risen to the level of a global pandemic. Growing evidence has proven the cardiac involvement in SARS-CoV-2 infection. This study aims to evaluate the ability of cardiovascular complications determined by elevated troponin and electrocardiogram findings (e.g., corrected QT interval (QTc)) in predicting the severity of SARS-CoV-2 infection among hospitalized patients. METHODS: This is a retrospective review of medical records of 800 patients, admitted to Richmond University Medical Center in Staten Island, NY, and tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 between March 1, 2020 and July 31, 2020. A total of 339 patients met the study inclusion and exclusion criteria and were included in statistical analysis. RESULTS: Elevated serum troponin levels on admission statistically correlated with mortality in SARS-CoV-2 patients. Prolonged QTc was shown to have an independent statistically significant association with mortality among patients hospitalized with SARS-CoV-2. CONCLUSIONS: Growing concern for cardiovascular sequelae of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has prompted many researchers to investigate the role of cardiovascular complications in mortality due to SARS-CoV-2. Obtaining a simple electrocardiogram for hospitalized patients with COVID-19 could provide an independent prognostic tool and prompt more coordinated treatment strategies to prevent mortality among patients hospitalized with COVID-19.

A Re-Evaluation of the Effect of Trauma Center Verification Level on the Early Risk of Death in Hemodynamically Unstable Patients.

Background Studies show increased early and overall mortality at level II compared to level I trauma centers in hemodynamically unstable patients. We hypothesize there is no mortality difference between level I and level II centers applying more contemporary data. Study design Utilizing the 2017 Trauma Quality Program Participant Use File (TQP-PUF), we identified adult patients (age >14 years) who presented to an American College of Surgeons (ACS) verified level I or II center with hypotension (systolic blood pressure [SBP] < 90 mmHg). Logistic regression was performed to identify adjusted associations with mortality. Results A total of 7,264 patients met the inclusion criteria, of whom most were males (4,924 [67.8%]) with blunt trauma (5,924 [81.6%]) being predominated. Mean admission SBP was 73.2 (±13.0) mmHg. There were 1,097 (15.1%) deaths. Level I admissions (4,931 (67.9%]) were more likely male (3,389 [68.7%] vs. 1,535 [65.8]; p=0.012), non-white (3,119 [63.3%] vs. 1,664 [71.3%]; p<0.001), a victim of penetrating trauma (933 [18.9%] vs. 385 [16.5%]; p=0.015), and more severely injured (mean Injury Severity Score: 19.3 [±15] vs. 16.7 [±13.7]; p<0.001). Level II admissions (2,333 [32.1%]) were older (46.8 [±18.5] vs. 50.3 [±20.1] years; p<0.001) with more co-morbidities (mean Charlson Comorbidity Index: 1.43 [±2] vs. 1.77 [±2.2]; p<0.001). Adjusted mortality between level I and II admissions was similar (766 [15.5%] vs. 331 [14.2%]; p=0.918). Early hourly mortality also did not differ. Conclusion There is no overall or hourly mortality discrepancy between ACS-verified level I and II centers for patients presenting with hypotension. This potentially relates to the use of more contemporary data gathered after implementation of updated verification requirements.