Valoración de la eficacia analgésica del bloqueo facetario lumbar en función de la técnica de imagen utilizada: ecografía frente a fluoroscopia / Evaluation of the analgesic efficacy of lumbar facet block as a function of the imaging technique used: ultrasound versus fluoroscopy

Objetivo: En la lumbalgia mecánica por síndrome facetario lumbar están indicadas como opciones terapéuticas los bloqueos periarticulares e intrarticulares de las articulaciones facetarias lumbares, así como el bloqueo nervioso del ramo medial de la raíz o ramo posterior del nervio raquídeo. El bloqueo nervioso del ramo medial puede llevarse a cabo mediante control ecográfico o radioscópico. El objetivo de este estudio es valorar si existen diferencias en la eficacia analgésica del bloqueo en función de la técnica de imagen con la que se lleva a cabo (ecografía frente a radioscopia-fluoroscopia). Pacientes y método: Se ha realizado un estudio clínico transversal durante el mes de noviembre de 2020, analizando los bloqueos facetarios realizados en la Unidad del Dolor del Hospital Universitario Clínico de Salamanca entre mayo de 2018 y septiembre de 2020. La muestra analizada cuenta con 315 pacientes, de los cuales 212 fueron sometidos a bloqueo facetario ecoguiado en consulta y 103 se realizaron bajo control radioscópico en el quirófano. Se ha evaluado la medida del dolor inicial, previo al bloqueo, mediante la escala analógica visual (EVA inicial), así como la EVA final y el porcentaje de mejoría subjetiva recogido en los 15 días posteriores a la realización de la intervención, valorando sus diferencias en función de la técnica de imagen empleada para su realización. Resultados: Los valores de EVA final de los pacientes que se realizaron el bloqueo mediante radioscopia y la de aquellos que lo realizaron ecoguiado fue similar, con un resultado final de 3,5 (mediana), así como el porcentaje de mejoría subjetiva que también fue similar en ambos grupos, alcanzando esta el 50 %. Conclusiones: No existen diferencias en la eficacia analgésica del bloqueo facetario lumbar en función de la técnica de imagen empleada para su realización: radioscopia-fluoroscopia o ecografía.(AU)

Objective: In mechanical low back pain due to lumbar facet syndrome, periarticular and intra-articular blocks of the lumbar facet joints as well as nerve blocks of the medial branch of the spinal nerve root or posterior branch of the spinal nerve are indicated as therapeutic options. The nerve block of the medial branch can be performed by ultrasound or radioscopic monitoring. The aim of this study is to assess whether there are differences in the analgesic efficacy of the block depending on the imaging technique used (ultrasound versus fluoroscopic-radioscopy). Patients and method: A cross-sectional clinical study was conducted during the month of November 2020, analysing the facet blocks performed in the Pain Unit of the Hospital Universitario Clínico de Salamanca between May 2018 and September 2020. The sample analysed consisted of 315 patients, of whom 212 underwent an echo-guided facet block in consultation and 103 were performed under radioscopic control in the operating theatre. The initial pain measurement, prior to the block, was evaluated using the visual analogue scale (initial VAS), as well as the final VAS and the percentage of subjective improvement recorded 15 days after the intervention, assessing the differences according to the imaging technique used for its performance. Results: The final VAS values of the patients who underwent radioscopic block and those who underwent echo-guided block were similar, with a final result of 3.5 (median), as was the percentage of subjective improvement, which was also similar in both groups, reaching 50 %. Conclusions: There are no differences in the analgesic efficacy of the lumbar facet block depending on the imaging technique used for its performance: fluoroscopy-radioscopy or ultrasound.(AU)

C-Reactive protein and SOFA scale: A simple score as early predictor of critical care requirement in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia in Spain.

OBJECTIVE: To identify potential markers at admission predicting the need for critical care in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. MATERIAL AND METHODS: An approved, observational, retrospective study was conducted between March 15 to April 15, 2020. 150 adult patients aged less than 75 with Charlson comorbidity index ≤6 diagnosed with COVID-19 pneumonia were included. Seventy-five patients were randomly selected from those admitted to the critical care units (critical care group [CG]) and seventy-five hospitalized patients who did not require critical care (non-critical care group [nCG]) represent the control group. One additional cohort of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 were used to validate the score. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Multivariable regression showed increasing odds of in-hospital critical care associated with increased C-reactive protein (CRP) (odds ratio 1.052 [1.009-1.101]; P = 0.0043) and higher Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score (1.968 [1.389-2.590]; P < 0.0001), both at the time of hospital admission. The AUC-ROC for the combined model was 0.83 (0.76-0.90) (vs AUC-ROC SOFA P < 0.05). The AUC-ROC for the validation cohort was 0.89 (0.82-0.95) (P > 0.05 vs AUC-ROC development). CONCLUSION: Patients COVID-19 presenting at admission SOFA score ≥ 2 combined with CRP ≥ 9.1 mg/mL could be at high risk to require critical care.

C-Reactive protein and SOFA scale: A simple score as early predictor of critical care requirement in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia in Spain. / Proteína C reactiva y escala SOFA: una simple escala como factor predictivo temprano de la necesidad de cuidados críticos en los pacientes con neumonía causada por COVID-19 en España.

OBJECTIVE: To identify potential markers at admission predicting the need for critical care in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. MATERIAL AND METHODS: An approved, observational, retrospective study was conducted between March 15 to April 15, 2020. 150 adult patients aged less than 75 with Charlson comorbidity index ≤6 diagnosed with COVID-19 pneumonia were included. Seventy-five patients were randomly selected from those admitted to the critical care units (critical care group [CG]) and seventy-five hospitalized patients who did not require critical care (non-critical care group [nCG]) represent the control group. One additional cohort of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 were used to validate the score. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Multivariable regression showed increasing odds of in-hospital critical care associated with increased C-reactive protein (CRP) (odds ratio 1.052 [1.009-1.101]; P=.0043) and higher Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score (1.968 [1.389-2.590]; P<.0001), both at the time of hospital admission. The AUC-ROC for the combined model was 0.83 (0.76-0.90) (vs AUC-ROC SOFA P<.05). The AUC-ROC for the validation cohort was 0.89 (0.82-0.95) (P>0.05 vs AUC-ROC development). CONCLUSION: Patients COVID-19 presenting at admission SOFA score ≥2 combined with CRP ≥9,1mg/mL could be at high risk to require critical care.

[C-Reactive protein and SOFA scale: A simple score as early predictor of critical care requirement in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia in Spain]. / Proteína C reactiva y escala SOFA: una simple escala como factor predictivo temprano de la necesidad de cuidados críticos en los pacientes con neumonía causada por COVID-19 en España.

OBJECTIVE: To identify potential markers at admission predicting the need for critical care in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. MATERIAL AND METHODS: An approved, observational, retrospective study was conducted between March 15 to April 15, 2020. 150 adult patients aged less than 75 with Charlson comorbidity index ≤ 6 diagnosed with COVID-19 pneumonia were included. Seventy-five patients were randomly selected from those admitted to the critical care units (critical care group [CG]) and seventy-five hospitalized patients who did not require critical care (non-critical care group [nCG]) represent the control group. One additional cohort of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 were used to validate the score. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Multivariable regression showed increasing odds of in-hospital critical care associated with increased C-reactive protein (CRP) (odds ratio 1.052 [1.009-1.101]; P = .0043) and higher Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score (1.968 [1.389-2.590]; P < .0001), both at the time of hospital admission. The AUC-ROC for the combined model was 0.83 (0.76-0.90) (vs AUC-ROC SOFA P < .05). The AUC-ROC for the validation cohort was 0.89 (0.82-0.95) (P > 0.05 vs AUC-ROC development). CONCLUSION: Patients COVID-19 presenting at admission SOFA score ≥ 2 combined with CRP ≥ 9,1 mg/mL could be at high risk to require critical care.