Gregory J. Fermann

Point of care testing in the emergency department

Point of care (POC) testing in the Emergency Department (ED) is becoming more common. The implementation and maintenance of POC testing in the ED, however, is a complex issue. We performed a systematic review of the English language literature published between 1985 and June 2001 with a focus on POC testing and ED application. Articles that addressed the following were included in the review: implementation of POC testing, maintenance and regulation of POC testing, and application of POC testing. Current POC technology has been found to be reliable in various patient care settings, including the ED. Cost and connectivity issues are complex and difficult to assess, making these the greatest barriers to the full acceptance of POC testing in the ED. Patient care issues must be weighed against the cost of implementing POC testing and supporting the infrastructure needed to maintain this technology in the ED.

Early management of patients with acute heart failure: State of the art and future directions. A consensus document from the society for academic emergency medicine/heart failure society of america acute heart failure working group

Heart failure (HF) afflicts nearly 6 million Americans, resulting in one million emergency department (ED) visits and over one million annual hospital discharges. An aging population and improved survival from cardiovascular diseases is expected to further increase HF prevalence. Emergency providers play a significant role in the management of patients with acute heart failure (AHF). It is crucial that emergency physicians and other providers involved in early management understand the latest developments in diagnostic testing, therapeutics and alternatives to hospitalization. Further, clinical trials must be conducted in the ED in order to improve the evidence base and drive optimal initial therapy for AHF. Should ongoing and future studies suggest early phenotype-driven therapy improves in-hospital and post-discharge outcomes, ED treatment decisions will need to evolve accordingly. The potential impact of future studies which incorporate risk-stratification into ED disposition decisions cannot be underestimated. Predictive instruments that identify a cohort of patients safe for ED discharge, while simultaneously addressing barriers to successful outpatient management, have the potential to significantly impact quality of life and resource expenditures.

Clevidipine in acute heart failure: Results of the A Study of Blood Pressure Control in Acute Heart Failure - A Pilot Study (PRONTO)

BACKGROUND Rapid blood pressure (BP) control improves dyspnea in hypertensive acute heart failure (AHF). Although effective antihypertensives, calcium-channel blockers are poorly studied in AHF. Clevidipine is a rapidly acting, arterial selective intravenous calcium-channel blocker. Our purpose was to determine the efficacy and safety of clevidipine vs standard-of-care intravenous antihypertensive therapy (SOC) in hypertensive AHF. METHODS This is a randomized, open-label, active control study of clevidipine vs SOC in emergency department patients with AHF having systolic BP ≥160 mm Hg and dyspnea ≥50 on a 100-mm visual analog scale (VAS). Coprimary end points were median time to, and percent attaining, a systolic BP within a prespecified target BP range (TBPR) at 30 minutes. Dyspnea reduction was the main secondary end point. RESULTS Of 104 patients (mean [SD] age 61 [14.9] years, 52% female, 80% African American), 51 received clevidipine and 53 received SOC. Baseline mean (SD) systolic BP and VAS dyspnea were 186.5 (23.4) mm Hg and 64.8 (19.6) mm. More clevidipine patients (71%) reached TBPR than did those receiving SOC (37%; P = .002), and clevidipine was faster to TBPR (P = .0006). At 45 minutes, clevidipine patients had greater mean (SD) VAS dyspnea improvement than did SOC patients (-37 [20.9] vs -28 mm [21.7], P = .02), a difference that remained significant up to 3 hours. Serious adverse events (24% vs 19%) and 30-day mortality (3 vs 2) were similar between clevedipine and SOC, respectively, and there were no deaths during study drug administration. CONCLUSIONS In hypertensive AHF, clevidipine safely and rapidly reduces BP and improves dyspnea more effectively than SOC.

Galectin 3 complements BNP in risk stratification in acute heart failure

Background: Galectin 3 (G3) is a mediator of fibrosis and remodeling in heart failure. Methods: Patients diagnosed with and treated for Acute Heart Failure Syndromes were prospectively enrolled in the Decision Making in Acute Decompensated Heart Failure multicenter trial. Results: Patients with a higher G3 had a history of renal disease, a lower heart rate and acute kidney injury. They also tended to have a history of HF and 30-day adverse events compared with B-type natriuretic peptide. Conclusion: In Acute Heart Failure Syndromes, G3 levels do not provide prognostic value, but when used complementary to B-type natriuretic peptide, G3 is associated with renal dysfunction and may predict 30-day events.

Elevated urinary neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalcin after acute heart failure treatment is associated with worsening renal function and adverse events

Reliable detectors of worsening renal function (WRF) in Emergency Department (ED) patients with acute heart failure (AHF) are limited. We hypothesized that initial urinary neutrophil gelatinase‐associated lipocalcin (NGAL) levels, and changes in urinary NGAL levels after initial ED AHF therapy, would be associated with WRF and adverse events.

Acute Detection of ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Missed on Standard 12-Lead ECG With a Novel 80-Lead Real-Time Digital Body Surface Map: Primary Results From the Multicenter OCCULT MI Trial

STUDY OBJECTIVE Although 80-lead ECG body surface mapping is more sensitive for ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) than the 12-lead ECG, its clinical utility in chest pain in the emergency department (ED) has not been studied. We sought to determine the prevalence, clinical care patterns, and clinical outcomes of patients with STEMI identified on 80-lead but not on 12-lead (80-lead-only STEMI). METHODS The Optimal Cardiovascular Diagnostic Evaluation Enabling Faster Treatment of Myocardial Infarction trial was a multicenter prospective observational study of moderate- to high-risk chest pain patients presenting to the ED. Patients received simultaneous 12-lead and 80-lead ECGs as part of their initial evaluation and were treated according to the standard of care, with clinicians blinded to the 80-lead results. The primary outcome of the trial was door-to-sheath time in patients with 80-lead-only STEMI versus patients with STEMI identified by 12-lead alone (12-lead STEMI). Secondary outcomes included angiographic and clinical outcomes at 30 days. RESULTS One thousand eight hundred thirty patients were evaluated, 91 had a discharge diagnosis of 12-lead STEMI, and 25 patients met criteria for 80-lead-only STEMI. Eighty-four of the 91 12-lead STEMI patients underwent cardiac catheterization, with a median door-to-sheath time of 54 minutes, versus 14 of the 25 80-lead-only STEMI patients, with a door-to-sheath time of 1,002 minutes (estimated treatment difference in median=881; 95% confidence interval 181 to 1,079 minutes). Clinical outcomes and revascularization rates, however, were similar between 80-lead-only STEMI and 12-lead STEMI patients. CONCLUSION The 80-lead ECG provides an incremental 27.5% increase in STEMI detection versus the 12-lead. Patients with 80-lead-only STEMI have adverse outcomes similar to those of 12-lead STEMI patients but are treated with delayed or conservative invasive strategies.

Risk stratification in acute heart failure: rationale and design of the STRATIFY and DECIDE studies.

BACKGROUND A critical challenge for physicians facing patients presenting with signs and symptoms of acute heart failure (AHF) is how and where to best manage them. Currently, most patients evaluated for AHF are admitted to the hospital, yet not all warrant inpatient care. Up to 50% of admissions could be potentially avoided and many admitted patients could be discharged after a short period of observation and treatment. Methods for identifying patients that can be sent home early are lacking. Improving the physicians ability to identify and safely manage low-risk patients is essential to avoiding unnecessary use of hospital beds. METHODS Two studies (STRATIFY and DECIDE) have been funded by the National Heart Lung and Blood Institute with the goal of developing prediction rules to facilitate early decision making in AHF. Using prospectively gathered evaluation and treatment data from the acute setting (STRATIFY) and early inpatient stay (DECIDE), rules will be generated to predict risk for death and serious complications. Subsequent studies will be designed to test the external validity, utility, generalizability and cost-effectiveness of these prediction rules in different acute care environments representing racially and socioeconomically diverse patient populations. RESULTS A major innovation is prediction of 5-day as well as 30-day outcomes, overcoming the limitation that 30-day outcomes are highly dependent on unpredictable, post-visit patient and provider behavior. A novel aspect of the proposed project is the use of a comprehensive cardiology review to correctly assign post-treatment outcomes to the acute presentation. CONCLUSIONS Finally, a rigorous analysis plan has been developed to construct the prediction rules that will maximally extract both the statistical and clinical properties of every data element. Upon completion of this study we will subsequently externally test the prediction rules in a heterogeneous patient cohort.

Identification of Emergency Department Patients With Acute Heart Failure at Low Risk for 30-Day Adverse Events : The STRATIFY Decision Tool

OBJECTIVES No prospectively derived or validated decision tools identify emergency department (ED) patients with acute heart failure (AHF) at low risk for 30-day adverse events who are thus potential candidates for safe ED discharge. This study sought to accomplish that goal. BACKGROUND The nearly 1 million annual ED visits for AHF are associated with high proportions of admissions and consume significant resources. METHODS We prospectively enrolled 1,033 patients diagnosed with AHF in the ED from 4 hospitals between July 20, 2007, and February 4, 2011. We used an ordinal outcome hierarchy, defined as the incidence of the most severe adverse event within 30 days of ED evaluation (acute coronary syndrome, coronary revascularization, emergent dialysis, intubation, mechanical cardiac support, cardiopulmonary resuscitation, and death). RESULTS Of 1,033 patients enrolled, 126 (12%) experienced at least one 30-day adverse event. The decision tool had a C statistic of 0.68 (95% confidence interval: 0.63 to 0.74). Elevated troponin (p < 0.001) and renal function (p = 0.01) were significant predictors of adverse events in our multivariable model, whereas B-type natriuretic peptide (p = 0.09), tachypnea (p = 0.09), and patients undergoing dialysis (p = 0.07) trended toward significance. At risk thresholds of 1%, 3%, and 5%, we found 0%, 1.4%, and 13.0% patients were at low risk, with negative predictive values of 100%, 96%, and 93%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS The STRATIFY decision tool identifies ED patients with AHF who are at low risk for 30-day adverse events and may be candidates for safe ED discharge. After external testing, and perhaps when used as part of a shared decision-making strategy, it may significantly affect disposition strategies. (Improving Heart Failure Risk Stratification in the ED [STRATIFY]; NCT00508638).

Early Management of Patients With Acute Heart Failure: State of the Art and Future Directions—A Consensus Document from the SAEM/HFSA Acute Heart Failure Working Group

Heart failure (HF) afflicts nearly 6 million Americans, resulting in 1 million emergency department (ED) visits and over 1 million annual hospital discharges. The majority of inpatient admissions originate in the ED; thus, it is crucial that emergency physicians and other providers involved in early management understand the latest developments in diagnostic testing, therapeutics, and alternatives to hospitalization. This article discusses contemporary ED management as well as the necessary next steps for ED-based acute HF research.

Ground Emergency Medical Services Requests for Helicopter Transfer of ST-segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Patients Decrease Medical Contact to Balloon Times in Rural and Suburban Settings

OBJECTIVES   ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) care is time-dependent. Many STEMI patients require interhospital helicopter transfer for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) if ground emergency medical services (EMS) initially transport the patient to a non-PCI center. This investigation models potential time savings of ground EMS requests for helicopter EMS (HEMS) transport of a STEMI patient directly to a PCI center, rather than usual transport to a local hospital with subsequent transfer. METHODS   Data from a multicenter retrospective chart review of STEMI patients transferred for primary PCI by a single HEMS agency over 12 months were used to model medical contact to balloon times (MCTB) for two scenarios: a direct-to-scene HEMS response and hospital rendezvous after ground EMS initiation of transfer. RESULTS   Actual MCTB median time for 36 hospital-initiated transfers was 160 minutes (range = 116 to 321 minutes). Scene response MCTB median time was estimated as 112 minutes (range = 69 to 187 minutes). The difference in medians was 48 minutes (95% confidence interval [CI] = 33 to 62 minutes). Hospital rendezvous MCTB median time was estimated as 113 minutes (range = 74 to 187 minutes). The difference in medians was 47 minutes (95% CI = 32 to 62 minutes). No patient had an actual MCTB time of less than 90 minutes; in the scene response and hospital rendezvous scenarios, 2 of 36 (6%) and 3 of 36 (8%), respectively, would have had MCTB times under 90 minutes. CONCLUSIONS   In this setting, ground EMS initiation of HEMS transfers for STEMI patients has the potential to reduce MCTB time, but most patients will still not achieve MCTB time of less than 90 minutes.