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.

[Pre-hospital management of a psychiatric emergency]. / Prise en charge préhospitalière d'une urgence psychiatrique.

The pre-hospital care process of a patient presenting a psychiatric emergency involves many pre-hospital and hospital personnel. Identifying such high-risk situations, allowing an initial approach that is adjusted and authorises care are often very delicate moments. An adapted management, concerted within a network, allows the safety of the patient, his entourage and the interveners. These situations are characterised by their polymorphism with major constants: training, anticipation and knowledge of organisations.

[The elderly with a psychiatric prognosis in the emergency room]. / Le sujet âgé à présentation psychiatrique aux urgences.

In the emergency department, the diagnosis of an acute psychiatric condition in an elderly patient should only be made after rigorous clinical and paraclinical examinations to rule out any somatic pathology. In addition, the management and treatment of acute agitation must be adapted.

Red Blood Cell Transfusion in the Emergency Department: An Observational Cross-Sectional Multicenter Study.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to describe red blood cell (RBC) transfusions in the emergency department (ED) with a particular focus on the hemoglobin (Hb) level thresholds that are used in this setting. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study of 12 EDs including all adult patients that received RBC transfusion in January and February 2018. Descriptive statistics were reported. Logistic regression was performed to assess variables that were independently associated with a pre-transfusion Hb level ≥ 8 g/dL. RESULTS: During the study period, 529 patients received RBC transfusion. The median age was 74 (59-85) years. The patients had a history of cancer or hematological disease in 185 (35.2%) cases. Acute bleeding was observed in the ED for 242 (44.7%) patients, among which 145 (59.9%) were gastrointestinal. Anemia was chronic in 191 (40.2%) cases, mostly due to vitamin or iron deficiency or to malignancy with transfusion support. Pre-transfusion Hb level was 6.9 (6.0-7.8) g/dL. The transfusion motive was not notified in the medical chart in 206 (38.9%) cases. In the multivariable logistic regression, variables that were associated with a higher pre-transfusion Hb level (≥8 g/dL) were a history of coronary artery disease (OR: 2.09; 95% CI: 1.29-3.41), the presence of acute bleeding (OR: 2.44; 95% CI: 1.53-3.94), and older age (OR: 1.02/year; 95% CI: 1.01-1.04). CONCLUSION: RBC transfusion in the ED was an everyday concern and involved patients with heterogeneous medical situations and severity. Pre-transfusion Hb level was rather restrictive. Almost half of transfusions were provided because of acute bleeding which was associated with a higher Hb threshold.

Early management of severe abdominal trauma.

OBJECTIVE: To develop French guidelines on the management of patients with severe abdominal trauma. DESIGN: A consensus committee of 20 experts from the French Society of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine (Société française d'anesthésie et de réanimation, SFAR), the French Society of Emergency Medicine (Société française de médecine d'urgence, SFMU), the French Society of Urology (Société française d'urologie, SFU) and from the French Association of Surgery (Association française de chirurgie, AFC), the Val-de-Grâce School (École du Val-De-Grâce, EVG) and the Federation for Interventional Radiology (Fédération de radiologie interventionnelle, FRI-SFR) was convened. Declaration of all conflicts of interest (COI) policy by all participants was mandatory throughout the development of the guidelines. The entire guideline 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 for assessment of the available level of evidence with particular emphasis to avoid formulating strong recommendations in the absence of high level. Some recommendations were left ungraded. METHODS: The guidelines are divided in diagnostic and, therapeutic strategy and early surveillance. All questions were formulated according to Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcomes (PICO) format. The panel focused on three questions for diagnostic strategy: (1) What is the diagnostic performance of clinical signs to suggest abdominal injury in trauma patients? (2) Suspecting abdominal trauma, what is the diagnostic performance of prehospital FAST (Focused Abdominal Sonography for Trauma) to rule in abdominal injury and guide the prehospital triage of the patient? and (3) When suspecting abdominal trauma, does carrying out a contrast enhanced thoraco-abdominal CT scan allow identification of abdominal injuries and reduction of mortality? Four questions dealt with therapeutic strategy: (1) After severe abdominal trauma, does immediate laparotomy reduce morbidity and mortality? (2) Does a "damage control surgery" strategy decrease morbidity and mortality in patients with a severe abdominal trauma? (3) Does a laparoscopic approach in patients with abdominal trauma decrease mortality or morbidity? and (4) Does non-operative management of patients with abdominal trauma without bleeding reduce mortality and morbidity? Finally, one question was formulated regarding the early monitoring of these patients: In case of severe abdominal trauma, which kind of initial monitoring does allow to reduce the morbi-mortality? The analysis of the literature and the recommendations were conducted following the GRADE® methodology. RESULTS: The SFAR/SFMU Guideline panel provided 15 statements on early management of severe abdominal trauma. After three rounds of discussion and various amendments, a strong agreement was reached for 100% of recommendations. Of these recommendations, five have a high level of evidence (Grade 1±), six have a low level of evidence (Grade 2±) and four are expert judgments. Finally, no recommendation was provided for one question. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial agreement exists among experts regarding many strong recommendations for the best early management of severe abdominal trauma.

Monitoring stress among internal medicine residents: an experience-driven, practical and short measure.

Residents experience severely high levels of stress, depression and burnout, leading to perceived medical errors, as well as to symptoms of impairment, such as chronic anger, cognitive impairment, suicidal behavior and substance abuse. Because research has not yet provided a psychometrically robust population-specific tool to measure the level of stress of medicine residents, we aimed at building and validating such a measure. Using an inductive scale development approach, a short, pragmatic measure was built, based on the interviews of 17 medicine residents. The Internal Medicine Residency Stress Scale (IMRSS) was then administered in a sample of 259 internal medicine residents (199 females, 60 males, MAge = 25.6) along with the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Maslach Burnout Inventory, Satisfaction With Life Scale and Ways of Coping Checklist. The IMRSS showed satisfactory internal reliability (Cronbach's α = .86), adequate structural validity - studied through Confirmatory Factor Analysis (χ2/df = 2.51, CFI = .94; SRMR = .037, RMSEA = .076) - and good criterion validity - the IMRSS was notably strongly correlated with emotional exhaustion (r = .64; p < .001) and anxiety (r = .57; p < .001). Because of its short length and robust psychometric qualities, the use of the IMRSS is recommended to quickly and frequently assess and monitor stress among internal medicine residents.

Bacteriocin from epidemic Listeria strains alters the host intestinal microbiota to favor infection.

Listeria monocytogenes is responsible for gastroenteritis in healthy individuals and for a severe invasive disease in immunocompromised patients. Among the three identified L. monocytogenes evolutionary lineages, lineage I strains are overrepresented in epidemic listeriosis outbreaks, but the mechanisms underlying the higher virulence potential of strains of this lineage remain elusive. Here, we demonstrate that Listeriolysin S (LLS), a virulence factor only present in a subset of lineage I strains, is a bacteriocin highly expressed in the intestine of orally infected mice that alters the host intestinal microbiota and promotes intestinal colonization by L. monocytogenes, as well as deeper organ infection. To our knowledge, these results therefore identify LLS as the first bacteriocin described in L. monocytogenes and associate modulation of host microbiota by L. monocytogenes epidemic strains to increased virulence.