Evaluation of the role of repeated inferior vena cava sonography in estimating first 24 h fluid requirement in resuscitation of major blunt trauma patients in emergency department Suez Canal University Hospital.

INTRODUCTION: The assessment of hemodynamic status in polytrauma patients is an important principle of the primary survey of trauma patients, and screening for ongoing hemorrhage and assessing the efficacy of resuscitation is vital in avoiding preventable death and significant morbidity in these patients. Invasive procedures may lead to various complications and the IVC ultrasound measurements are increasingly recognized as a potential noninvasive replacement or a source of adjunct information. AIMOF THIS STUDY: The study aimed to determine if repeated ultrasound assessment of the inferior vena cava (diameter, collapsibility (IVC- CI) in major trauma patients presenting with collapsible IVC before resuscitation and after the first hour of resuscitation will predict total intravenous fluid requirements at first 24 h. PATIENTS & METHODS: The current study was conducted on 120 patients presented to the emergency department with Major blunt trauma (having significant injury to two or more ISS body regions or an ISS greater than 15). The patients(cases) group (shocked group) (60) patients with signs of shock such as decreased blood pressure < 90/60 mmHg or a more than 30% decrease from the baseline systolic pressure, heart rate > 100 b/m, cold, clammy skin, capillary refill > 2 s and their shock index above0.9. The control group (non-shocked group) (60) patients with normal blood pressure and heart rate, no other signs of shock (normal capillary refill, warm skin), and (shock index ≤ 0.9). Patients were evaluated at time 0 (baseline), 1 h after resucitation, and 24 h after 1st hour for:(blood pressure, pulse, RR, SO2, capillary refill time, MABP, IVCci, IVCmax, IVCmin). RESULTS: Among 120 Major blunt trauma patients, 98 males (81.7%) and 22 females (18.3%) were included in this analysis; hypovolemic shocked patients (60 patients) were divided into two main groups according to IVC diameter after the first hour of resuscitation; IVC repleted were 32 patients (53.3%) while 28 patients (46.7%) were IVC non-repleted. In our study population, there were statistically significant differences between repleted and non-repleted IVC cases regarding IVCD, DIVC min, IVCCI (on arrival) (after 1 h) (after 24 h of 1st hour of resuscitation) ( p-value < 0.05) and DIVC Max (on arrival) (after 1 h) (p-value < 0.001). There is no statistically significant difference (p-value = 0.075) between repleted and non-repleted cases regarding DIVC Max (after 24 h).In our study, we found that IVCci0 at a cut-off point > 38.5 has a sensitivity of 80.0% and Specificity of 85.71% with AUC 0.971 and a good 95% CI (0.938 - 1.0), which means that IVCci of 38.6% or more can indicate fluid responsiveness. We also found that IVCci 1 h (after fluid resuscitation) at cut-off point > 28.6 has a sensitivity of 80.0% and Specificity of 75% with AUC 0.886 and good 95% CI (0.803 - 0.968), which means that IVCci of 28.5% or less can indicate fluid unresponsiveness after 1st hour of resuscitation. We found no statistically significant difference between repleted and non-repleted cases regarding fluid requirement and amount of blood transfusion at 1st hour of resuscitation (p-value = 0.104). CONCLUSION: Repeated bedside ultrasonography of IVCD, and IVCci before and after the first hour of resuscitation could be an excellent reliable invasive tool that can be used in estimating the First 24 h of fluid requirement in Major blunt trauma patients and assessment of fluid status.

Sepsis patient evaluation emergency department (SPEED) score & mortality in emergency department sepsis (MEDS) score in predicting 28-day mortality of emergency sepsis patients.

PURPOSE: Sepsis is a common acute life-threatening condition that emergency physicians routinely face. Diagnostic options within the Emergency Department (ED) are limited due to lack of infrastructure, consequently limiting the use of invasive hemodynamic monitoring or imaging tests. The mortality rate due to sepsis can be assessed via multiple scoring systems, for example, mortality in emergency department sepsis (MEDS) score and sepsis patient evaluation in the emergency department (SPEED) score, both of which quantify the variation of mortality rates according to clinical findings, laboratory data, or therapeutic interventions. This study aims to improve the management processes of sepsis patients by comparing SPEED score and MEDS score for predicting the 28-day mortality in cases of emergency sepsis. METHODS: The study is a cross-sectional, prospective study including 61 sepsis patients in ED in Suez Canal University Hospital, Egypt, from August 2017 to June 2018. Patients were selected by two steps: (1) suspected septic patients presenting with at least one of the following abnormal clinical findings: (a) body temperature higher than 38 °C or lower than 36 °C, (b) heart rate higher than 90 beats/min, (c) hyperventilation evidenced by respiratory rate higher than 20 breaths/min or PaCO2 lower than 32 mmHg, and (d) white blood cell count higher than 12,000/µL or lower than 4000/µL; (2) confirmed septic patients with at least a 2-point increase from the baseline total sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score following infection. Other inclusion criteria included adult patients with an age ≥18 years regardless of gender and those who had either systemic inflammatory response syndrome or suspected/confirmed infection. Patients were shortly follow-up for the 28-day mortality. Each patient was subject to SPEED score and MEDS score and then the results were compared to detect which of them was more effective in predicting outcome. The receiver operating characteristic curves were also done for MEDS and SPEED scores. RESULTS: Among the 61 patients, 41 died with the mortality rate of 67.2%. The mortality rate increased with a higher SPEED and MEDS scores. Both SPEED and MEDS scores revealed significant difference between the survivors and nonsurvivors (p = 0.004 and p < 0.001, respectively), indicating that both the two systems are effective in predicting the 28-day mortality of sepsis patients. Thereafter, the receiver operating characteristic curves were plotted, which showed that SPEED was better than the MEDS score when applied to the complete study population with an area under the curve being 0.87 (0.788-0.963) as compared with 0.75 (0.634-0.876) for MEDS. Logistic regression analysis revealed that the best fitting predictor of 28-day mortality for sepsis patients was the SPEED scoring system. For every one unit increase in SPEED score, the odds of 28-day mortality increased by 37%. CONCLUSION: SPEED score is more useful and accurate than MEDS score in predicting the 28-day mortality among sepsis patients. Therefore SPEED rather than MEDS should be more widely used in the ED for sepsis patients.