The Times They Are A Changin': the "No Zone" Approach to Management of Penetrating Neck Trauma

Clinical Case: You're working a busy evening shift when a middle aged woman is brought in by EMS from the scene of a car accident.  She has a deep laceration to her anterior neck near the level of the cricoid cartilage from a glass shard.  She is neurologically intact, talking with a normal voice and is in no respiratory distress.  However, there is a continuous and brisk oozing of blood from the wound.

Clinical Question: What imaging is indicated in hemodynamically stable, neurologically intact patients with penetrating neck injuries?  What should the typical disposition be?

Literature Review:

Any neck wound that extends deep to the platysma is considered a penetrating neck wound, and it is estimated that they represent 5-10% of all trauma patients who arrive to the emergency department. Two common ways of anatomically dividing the neck include using the sternocleidomastoid to divide the neck into anterior and posterior triangles, or dividing the neck into three zones [1]:

In the event of penetrating injury to the neck, airway compromise should be immediately assessed, with early intubation for airway protection if there is any concern for expanding neck hematoma or concerns for airway injury.  An attempt can be made to orotracheally intubate (bougies have been suggested as excellent initial adjuncts [2]), but plans should be made to move to early cricothyroidotomy if the airway is unable to be secured from above. After securing the airway and establishing hemodynamic stability, the neck wound should be carefully inspected.  Injuries that breach the platysma may have caused significant underlying injury, and it is best to avoid probing these wounds at the bedside, as this could disrupt hemostasis.  Aside from risk of vascular disruption, patients with penetrating neck injuries warrant consideration of tracheal and esophageal compromise.  Signs of tracheal injury include air bubbling at the wound, hemoptysis, subcutaneous emphysema, and stridor.  Esophageal injuries can be initially be asymptomatic, and a missed injury can lead to neck space infection and mediastinitis [3].   Emergent surgical consultation is warranted, as patients with hemodynamic instability and/or "hard signs" of vascular or aerodigestive tract injury should go for emergent neck exploration [3].

Classically, management of hemodynamically stable patients with penetrating neck injuries was based on an anatomic "zone-based" approach mentioned above, with zone II injuries often going directly to surgical exploration and zone I and III injuries undergoing angiography, bronchoscopy, and esophagoscopy.  This approach was developed in the 1970’s, but it had several problems [4].  First, there may be poor correlation between the location of the neck wound and internal organ involvement, as there may be traversing of zones internally. Secondarily, the adoption of a mandatory-exploration policy lead to a high negative exploration rate (53% - 56%)[4,5].

With the rapid improvement and dissemination of the use of  CT over the past few decades, a “No Zone” management approach based on careful physical exam with CT angiography has been shown in surgical literature to decrease resource utilization and unnecessary surgical exploration, making the rigid zone approach less relevant [3].   Several studies have examined the sensitivity and specificity of CT angiography in stable patients with penetrating neck injury.  A study by Inaba et. al. prospectively evaluated an algorithm in which patients with "soft signs" of injury (venous oozing, non-expanding hematoma, minor hemoptysis, dysphonia, dysphagia, or small amount of subcutaneous emphysema) underwent an initial evaluation with CT-angiography and asymptomatic patients were observed [6].  Over a 31-month period, 453 patients with penetrating neck trauma were prospectively evaluated in their study.  186 of these patients had "soft signs" of clinical injury, and underwent CT angiography as their initial method of evaluation.  38.2% of these patients had an injury to zone II of the neck.  Using an aggregate gold standard of the final diagnosis at discharge which included operative exploration, catheter-based angiography, bronchoscopy, esophagogram and esophagoscopy results and clinical follow-up (duration not specified),  the sensitivity and specificity of CT Angiography for vascular or aerodigestive injury was 100% and 97.5 % respectively.  There were two patients who had false-positive findings of vascular injury (irregularities in the ICA) that were not present on follow-up with surgical exploration and/or angiography, and three patients had air tracking suspicious for aerodigestive tract injury that was not confirmed on follow-up imaging and endoscopic studies. 

As mentioned above, the "No Zone" approach combining clinical exam with imaging evaluation has the potential to decrease unnecessary neck exploration. A study by Osborn et. al. examined the rate of negative neck explorations in patients who were taken to the OR who did not have hard signs of injury.  They compared the rate of negative neck explorations amongst those patients who had a CT-A as part of their initial evaluation and those who did not, and found that CT angiography significantly reduced the negative neck exploration rate [7]:

Source: Osborn et al. (2008)

 In their review of penetrating neck trauma management, Shiroff at al. shared the algorithm below, comparing the traditional vs. "no zone" approach:

Image Source:  Reference 3

Take Home Points: Patients with penetrating neck trauma who are hemodynamically unstable or  display hard signs of vascular or aerodigestive should receive immediate surgical consultation with consideration for operative or invasive management.  As the traditional, anatomic approach to management of penetrating neck trauma is associated with a high rate of negative neck exploration, patients with soft signs of injury should be initially evaluated with CT angiography which has a high sensitivity for clinically-significant injury.

Submitted by Philip Chan, PGY-3
Edited by Maia Dorsett (@maiadorsett), PGY-4
Faculty reviewed by jason wagner (@TheTechDoc)

References
[1] Tintinalli’s Emergency Medicine, 7e.  Ch 257. 

[2] Daniel, Y., de Regloix, S., & Kaiser, E. (2014). Use of a Gum Elastic Bougie in a Penetrating Neck Trauma. Prehospital and disaster medicine, 29(02), 212-213.
[3] Shiroff, A. M., Gale, S. C., Martin, N. D., Marchalik, D., Petrov, D., Ahmed, H. M., ... & Gracias, V. H. (2013). Penetrating neck trauma: a review of management strategies and discussion of the ‘No Zone’approach. The American Surgeon, 79(1), 23-29.
[4] Prichayudh, S., Choadrachata-anun, J., Sriussadaporn, S., Pak-art, R., Sriussadaporn, S., Kritayakirana, K., & Samorn, P. (2015). Selective management of penetrating neck injuries using “no zone” approach. Injury.
[5] Varghese, A. (2013). Penetrating neck injury: a case report and review of management. Indian Journal of Surgery, 75(1), 43-46.
[6] Inaba, K., Branco, B. C., Menaker, J., Scalea, T. M., Crane, S., DuBose, J. J., ... & Demetriades, D. (2012). Evaluation of multidetector computed tomography for penetrating neck injury: a prospective multicenter study. Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery, 72(3), 576-584.

[7] Osborn, T. M., Bell, R. B., Qaisi, W., & Long, W. B. (2008). Computed tomographic angiography as an aid to clinical decision making in the selective management of penetrating injuries to the neck: a reduction in the need for operative exploration. Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery, 64(6), 1466-1471.

On Broken Teeth: Emergency Management of Dental Fractures

Clinical Scenario: One evening in the ED, a teenage boy is brought in by his mother for dental trauma after an altercation at school.  The boy reports that he was pushed to the ground in the scuffle, hitting face first into the concrete. On exam, pinkish-red material was visible at base of what remains of his frontal incisors.  It's been awhile since you took care of dental trauma and you decide to read more about it. 

Clinical Question: What are the different layers of teeth and how do they impact severity of dental injury? What are the risk factors for dental injury? How are dental fractures graded and what steps should the ED physician take to protect remaining tooth fragments? 

Source: wikipedia.org

Review: Traumatic dental injuries (TDI) are a common occurrence in both children and adults. Approximately 1 in 3 adults sustain dental trauma during their lifetime, the majority which occur in childhood. A wide variety of risk factors have been described in the literature. These include patient specific factors like ADHD, epilepsy, cerebral palsy, propensity for risk-taking behavior, and anatomic factors like over-jet (the horizontal distance between posterior surface of the maxillary incisors and the anterior surface of the mandibular incisors) and inadequate lip coverage. In a review of rates of TDI in epileptic patients, over half had suffered TDI, many with multiple injuries. Environmental factors include poor socioeconomic status, living in an overcrowded environment and poor road safety [1]. Etiologies of TDI are broad with the most common mechanism of injury being falls. Adolescents and adults are more likely to sustain TDI through organized sporting activities, traffic accidents and violent means including fighting and assault.  In children, dental fractures can be a presentation of non-accidental trauma, and therefore a complete a full physical exam, including skin exam, should be performed. 

With regard to anatomy, primary dentition consists of 20 teeth – 8 incisors, 4 canines and 8 molars, classically lettered A – T. The permanent dentition includes 28 to 32 teeth – 8 incisors, 4 canines, 8 premolars and 8 - 12 molars. The 32 permanent teeth are numbered from right to left on top and left to right on the bottom [2].

With regard to anatomy of the individual teeth, from the inside out a tooth is composed of pulp, dentin and enamel [2]. The visible portion of the tooth is referred to as the crown and consists all three layers. As the tooth extends underneath the gum line, the enamel portion thins and the dentin and pulp extend in to the alveolar bone covered by a thin layer of cementum. The apex of the tooth is the entry point of the neurovascular bundle supplying each tooth. Finally,  the periodontal ligament is a collagenous strructure that extends from the alveolar bone to the cementum surrounding the root of the tooth.

Image source: Tintinalli, JE et al: Tintinalli’s Emergency Medicine: A Comprehensive Study Guide, 7^th Ed via Accessmedicine.com

The primary traumatic dental injury classifications are concussion, subluxation, extrusion, luxation, intrusion, avulsion and fracture [3].  Examination of a TDI should include visual inspection, percussion testing, manual evaluation of tooth mobility and consideration for radiographic imaging to evaluate for associated alveolar bone injury and widening of the periodontal ligament space. Sensitivity testing (cold testing) is often less useful at the time of injury due to transient lack of pulpal response.   

Dental fractures aka "broken teeth" require different management based on the extent of the injury.  The Ellis classification, which subdivides dental fractures into three classes of injury,  is useful for ED providers because it determines emergent care of the dental fracture [4]: 
              -    Ellis I fractures involve only the enamel.  They typically require no emergency treatment. If sharp edges are present, those can be smoothed for patient comfort. Dentist follow up can be at the patient’s convenience.
              -    Ellis II fractures involve the dentin but not the pulp  and  can be identified on exam by the creamy yellow color of dentin compared to the whiter, harder enamel.  These fractures require more urgent care.  Because dentin is a microtubular structure, Ellis II fractures threaten the integrity of the pulp and can lead to contamination of the pulp by oral flora . After recognizing an Ellis II fracture, the ED provider should anesthetize, clean and dry the tooth (Peridex can be used to sterilize the tooth) and seal the exposed dentin, which can be done with dental cement . Urgent dental follow up in the next 24 hours is recommended. Patients will require frequent visits and radiographs.
              -   Ellis III fractures are full thickness and expose the pulp.  They can be identified by visualization of the pink-red pulp as well as bleeding from the pulp on cleaning of the tooth. Like Ellis II injuries, the pulp is at risk with these injuries but at a greater extent given the direct exposure of pulp to the oral environment. Ellis class III injuries require a two step sealing procedure. After anesthetizing, cleaning and drying the tooth, bleeding should be controlled with careful direct pressure. The first sealant layer is a calcium hydroxide base. On top of this base, the same dental cement coverage is applied. Like Ellis II injuries, Ellis III injuries require urgent dental follow up preferably within 24 hours.   

For children with injuries to primary teeth, pulp exposure is more often encountered given the relatively larger size of the pulp. The same approach to different fracture types are recommended for children. Children will often require a pulpotomy to better protect the pulp from infection, but this requires more specialized tools and can be performed by the dentist in rapid follow up.

Because dental fractures can have associated injuries, it is important to examine for associated intraoral lacerations, tooth subluxation or avulsion. Subluxations and avulsions may require repositioning of the tooth and splinting to adjacent teeth with zinc oxide based dressings like Coe-Pak  [little trick of the trade: since the applications of dental splints requires teeth to be dry, cut off the end of oxygen tubing and attach to the air or oxygen on the wall to blow air onto the teeth and dry them prior to application of an adhesive dental splint]. 

With all of these injuries, patients should be discharged with oral analgesics, a soft diet and urgent dental follow-up. Generally, topical anesthetics should be avoided. Routine use of systemic antibiotics has not demonstrated benefit, but patient specific factors, associated injuries and co-morbidities should be considered [5].    
  
Take-Home Points:  Dental fracture management depends on the Ellis classification. Anything more than an Ellis I fracture requires some degree of a protective coating applied in the ED and referral to urgent dental follow up.  Always examine patients thoroughly for other associated injuries and watch for NAT. 

Submitted by Sara Manning (@EM_SaraM), PGY-4
Faculty Reviewed by Rob Poirier

Everyday EBM Editor: Maia Dorsett (@maiadorsett)  

In case you were thinking that "Broken Teeth" would be a good name for a band, it's already taken.  Thank you google.  

References:
1. Glendor, U, “Aetiology and risk factors related to traumatic dental injuries a review of the literature.” 2009. Dental Traumatology. Vol 25: 19 – 31. 
2. Tintinalli, JE et al, : Tintinalli’s Emergency Medicine: A Comprehensive Study Guide, 7th Ed via Accessmedicine.com 
3. Dentaltraumaguide.org
4.DiAngelis et al, “International Association of Dental Traumatology guidelines for the management of traumatic dental injuries: 1. Fractures and luxations of permanent teeth.” 2012 Dental Traumatology. Vol 28: 2 – 12. 
5. ANDREASEN, J. O., STORGÅRD JENSEN, S. I. M. O. N., & SAE‐LIM, V. A. R. A. W. A. N. (2006). The role of antibiotics in preventing healing complications after traumatic dental injuries: a literature review. Endodontic Topics, 14(1), 80-92.

Theme Image Source: http://www.windsorstar.com

Consultant Teachings No. 2: Thoracolumbar Spinal Fractures - A Spine Consult Isn't Always Necessary

Clinical Scenario:  You are working one evening in the emergency department when an intoxicated young female is brought in by EMS after being involved in a reportedly high speed MVC.  She is clinically intoxicated, uncooperative and tachycardic.  She gets a pan-scan CT which identifies some facial fractures and isolated transverse process fractures of the thoracic spine.  As you decide on the next steps to take care of the patient, you debate whether to discuss the patient with a Spine specialist.

Clinical Question: Which spinal fractures should you discuss with a Spine specialist?  Are there some that do not require any intervention at all?

Literature Review:  With the increased availability and increased utilization of CT scanners in the ED, it has become common practice to “pan-scan” patients who present after a trauma, especially those patients who are obtunded/intoxicated or present following a high risk mechanism.  The use of the CT scan to identify thoracic or intrabdominal injuries has concomitantly lead to an increase in diagnosis of fractures of the thoracic and lumbar spine.  As an example, in one retrospective study conducted in the UK of 303 blunt trauma patients who had a Chest/Abdomen/Pelvis CT performed, only six scans (2%) identified thoracic injury and four (1.3%) demonstrated intrabdominal injury while 51 scans (17%) demonstrated an injury to the thoracolumbar spine [1].

With respect to screening for thoracolumbar spinal injuries specifically, the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma practice guideline now recommends CT scan as the primary imaging modality [2]. This is based on a body of evidence that strongly supports that CT scan is more sensitive than X-ray for detection of thoracolumbar spinal injuries.  For example, in one small German study of 107 minor trauma patients, radiographs had a sensitivity of only 49.2% and specificity of 54.7% for thoracolumbar spinal injury compared with CT scan which served as "gold standard" [3].

While CT scan is more sensitive, not all the spinal fractures that are found are clinically significant (i.e. requiring spine precautions or bracing/surgical intervention) [4].  For example, in the small German study cited above X-ray alone missed 16/28 fractures of the the mid thoracic spine, but none of these were considered  unstable [3].  Of the 94 fractures identified in 51 patients by Chest/Abdomen/Pelvis CT in the UK study, 43 (46%) were considered not clinically significant [1].  Thus, the increased sensitivity of our diagnostic evaluation of trauma not only increases our detection of clinically important fractures, but otherwise stable spinal trauma.

Spine consultation for certain types of stable spinal injuries often comes at the expense of increased patient wait times, prolonged spinal precautions,  increased institutional cost, decreased patient satisfaction, and possibly even poorer outcomes if such consultation delays a patient’s transfer to the floor or ICU [4].   Below is a guide to approaching and managing two types of commonly seen fractures in the Emergency Department.

Transverse Process Fractures  

Source: www. waybuilder.net

Transverse Processes (TPs) of the vertebrae primarily function as sites of paraspinal muscle and ligament attachments. They are part of the posterior column in the classic Denis “three column” classification, which divides the spinal column into anterior, middle and posterior structural elements. The vertebral body consists of the anterior and middle columns and is the main axial load bearing part of the spinal unit. The posterior column consists of the elements behind the vertebral body, with the most important components being the pedicles, facet joints and ligamentous complex. Stability for the spinal column is maintained through a series of attachments between the various spinal elements (anterior, middle and posterior). An isolated TP fracture is a stable fracture and does not compromise spinal stability. Additionally, isolated TP fractures are not associated with neurologic deficits. The spinal cord and nerve roots are not in proximity to the TPs, nor are they at high risk of displacing in a manner that would put the nerve root or cord at risk.

A small 2008 retrospective study from the University of Missouri looked at a cohort of 84 patients with TP fractures; 47 were isolated and 37 were associated with other spine fractures [5]. In this study, no patients with isolated TP fractures required surgery or bracing for spinal stability. Furthermore, none of these patients had any neurologic deficits. The authors concluded that conservative management of isolated TP fractures was appropriate, without the need for orthopaedic or neurosurgical consultation. However, if the TP fracture is associated with another spinal fracture such as a vertebral body fracture, a specialist consultation is warranted for treatment recommendations regarding the associated injury, but not necessarily the TP fracture itself. Of course, a cervical TP fracture that extends into the transverse foramen also necessitates additonal imaging and likely spinal consultation, as it may warrant a CT angiogram for evaluation of vertebral artery damage.

Compression Fractures

Vertebral compression fractures are the most common fragility fracture, affecting approximately 25% of people over the age of 70. Compression fractures are a result of axial force on the anterior column that results in a wedge deformity of the vertebral body. The vast majority of compression fractures do not require surgical intervention. Moreover, these fractures are often stable due to their impacted nature. No study has proven that bracing vertebral compression fractures prevents further vertebral collapse, decreases pain, or improves patient satisfaction. Treatment of most vertebral body compression fractures can focus on reducing associated pain with appropriate pain medications. A thorough approach to a patient presenting with an acute compression fracture should include the following:

1: Patient factors: What was the mechanism of injury (simple fall or high-energy injury)? Is the patient ambulatory, bed or wheelchair bound? Are there significant medical comorbidities (ie morbid obesity, extensive pulmonary disease) that would make bracing an ineffective or even dangerous treatment option? Is the patient’s pain controlled enough to obtain an accurate neurologic exam? Is the patient tender over the spinal segment in question?

2: Fracture factors: Is the fracture stable or unstable? The best way to evaluate is to use the patient’s own physiologic forces to see if there is further displacement of the fracture. Barring any neurologic deficits, plain supine AND upright radiographs of the affected area should be obtained. The goal is to see if there is any significant height loss or increased kyphosis between the series. If not, it’s a safe bet that the fracture is stable.

Given a stable fracture, the next step is determined primarily by patient comfort level. If the patient is able to tolerate sustained physiologic loads (ie sitting or standing), it is reasonable to send them home with observation only, no bracing required. Follow up could be provided by their primary care provider or PM&R. If they are in too much pain to stand or sit despite appropriate analgesia, an extension orthosis (like an off-shelf TLSO) is sometimes beneficial and can be provided by the spine consultant on call. If the compression deformity is acute and deemed to be unstable, if there are any neurologic deficits or other associated spinal pathologies, certainly a spine consultation is necessary and appropriate at that time.

Take Home Points:  The increased use of CT imaging, especially in trauma, may lead to the identification of injuries that do not necessarily warrant intervention other than pain control.  For neurologically intact patients, it is useful for the emergency physician to be aware of which fractures warrant either bracing or surgical intervention as unnecessary  consultation can lead to prolonged length of stay and increased cost without significant benefit to the patient.

Submitted by Chris Cosgrove, Orthopedic Surgery PGY-2
Faculty Reviewed by : Lukas Zebala, MD, Assistant Professor, Orthopaedic Surgery

Everyday EBM Editor Maia Dorsett (@maiadorsett)

References:
1. Venkatesan, M., Fong, A., & Sell, P. J. (2012). CT scanning reduces the risk of missing a fracture of the thoracolumbar spine. Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery, British Volume, 94(8), 1097-1100.
2. Sixta, S., Moore, F. O., Ditillo, M. F., Fox, A. D., Garcia, A. J., Holena, D., ... & Cotton, B. (2012). Screening for thoracolumbar spinal injuries in blunt trauma: An Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma practice management guideline. Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery, 73(5), S326-S332.
3. Karul, M., Bannas, P., Schoennagel, B. P., Hoffmann, A., Wedegaertner, U., Adam, G., & Yamamura, J. (2013). Fractures of the thoracic spine in patients with minor trauma: Comparison of diagnostic accuracy and dose of biplane radiography and MDCT. European journal of radiology, 82(8), 1273-1277.
4. Homnick, A., Lavery, R., Nicastro, O., Livingston, D. H., & Hauser, C. J. (2007). Isolated thoracolumbar transverse process fractures: call physical therapy, not spine. Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery, 63(6), 1292-1295.
5. Bradley, L et al. Isolated transverse process fractures: spine service management not needed. J Trauma 2008 Oct; 65(4):832-6.

Needle that belly!

An infant female with no significant history presents to your trauma bay after reported accidental blunt trauma to the abdomen, the patient arrives from a referral hospital where plain films demonstrated free air. On arrival the patient show signs of hemodynamic instability and an elevated lactate. The patient was decompressed with "needle peritoneumostomy" prior to going to the OR for exploration. 

Clinical Question:

Can “tension pneumoperitoneum” cause hemodynamic instability?

Literature Review:

The presence of "free air" in the peritoneum is often diagnostically significant; however, the gas itself is rarely of clinical importance. An exception to this rule is in the case of a tension pneumoperitoneum. Tension pneumoperitoneum (TPP), also known as hyperacute abdominal

Example of pneumoperitoneum & football sign

compartment syndrome [1], or abdominal tamponade [2], is a rare, but potentially deadly event. Similar to tension pneumothorax, the underlying mechanism is a tissue flap that acts as a one-way valve for air release, resulting in a progressive increase in intra-abdominal pressure. The increasing peritoneal pressures may rapidly lead to respiratory compromise due to diaphragmatic elevation and a drop in cardiac output resulting from decreased venous return or aortic outflow due to occlusion. [3] This can progress to cardiovascular collapse and respiratory failure and eventually death. [2]

In one of the earliest reported cases in 1913, tension pneumoperitoneum was theorized to be a consequence of gas forming bacteria in the abdominal cavity. [4] Now it is known that tension pneumoperitoneum is usually a consequence of hollow viscus perforation, post-operative complications, positive pressure ventilation or other insulflation-dependent procedures (eg, colonoscopy, endoscopy, cystoscopy or air enema). There has even been reported cases from CPR. [9,10] However, there are few published case reports of TPP as a result of blunt force trauma. [3,6]

Hot bullet, dirty wound?

Clinical scenario:  You are working in the emergency department when a car pulls up, dropping off an otherwise healthy male who has suffered a gun shot wound (GSW) to left shoulder.  He says that he was in the rear passenger seat driving around with friends and "minding his own business" when he heard multiple gun shots.  He felt immediate pain in his left shoulder.  A full exam reveals two wounds to the left shoulder and nowhere else.  The patient has bilateral breath sounds and his left arm is neurovascularly intact.  X-rays demonstrate no pneumothorax, but the patient has a comminuted left scapular fracture:

You update the patient's tetanus,  administer pain control, and call Orthopedics.  The orthopedist on call asks that the patient receive prophylactic antibiotics. An ardent defender of antibiotic stewardship, you wonder if antibiotics are necessary.  Is it possible that the heat exposure that comes with firearm discharge sterilizes a contaminated bullet?  Do prophylactic antibiotics decrease the chance of infection?

Literature Review:
Question 1:  Does the heat of firearm discharge sterilize a contaminated bullet?

Image source: http://pixshark.com/

A study by Thoresby and Darlow from 1967 simulated GSWs  using a series of gelatin models, contaminated bullets, and contaminated overlying “clothes”[1].   There were 3 “series” of testing. The first fired bullets contaminated with Serratia marcescens into a gelatin block. The second fired sterile bullets shot through pieces of military fatigues inoculated with Serratia overlying the entrance or exits side of the gelatin (with a piece of foil in between the cloth and gelatin to avoid direct transmission). The third fired bullets through an aerosolized cloud of Serratia in front of the gelatin block.  Significantly, there was bacterial growth along the bullet track in the gelatin in all three series (except for their respective controls). This suggests that bullets are not sterilized by heat upon discharge of the gun. Furthermore, it demonstrates that bacteria were drawn into the cavitation space via vaccum forces in series in which inoculated cloth was placed on the exit site.

#FOAMed Digest No. 8: Thank You Sir, May I Have Another?

In the spirit of demonstrating how FOAM resources can reinforce resident curriculum, I thought for this installment of #FOAMed digest we would do something a little different and highlight FOAM resources that build on the topics and discussions from conference last week.  For those of you who didn't make it, the conference run down from last week:

             GI core content: esophagus and stomach
             Trauma Case Conference: Traumatic cardiac arrest in the blunt trauma patient 
                                                           Traumatic cerebrovascular injury
             Key papers in critical care
             Navigating the politics of innovation
                .... and a little on cognitive overload

For those of you who want to solidify and expand your knowledge,  you need not wait for tommorrow's review.  Here are some FOAM resources to help you do just that:

Disorders of the esophagus and stomach: Medical school taught you to memorize buzzwords and basics of management for disorders of the esophagus and stomach, but the FOAM world can expand

on this background and sometimes teach you to think critically about management decisions.  Here are some good FOAM resources on the Upper GI bleed:
              Who can I send home?  An oldie but goodie - a review from our own journal club on risk stratification for patients presenting with a GI bleed.
               Here is a critical review by EM Lyceum of upper GI bleed management including PPIs, octreotide in variceal bleeds, and conclusions from the good old NG lavage.  Some of things we do are really not that evidence-based.

Dr. Wessman's review of key article in critical care touched on GI also, recommending that we all read  this article published in NEJM, and reset our transfusion goal to 7 in the absence of massive hemorrhage.

And here is a link to the Scott Weingart video on Blakemore placement shown in conference. 

Traumatic Arrest:  Let's see if we can learn about things being done a little differently ... and prehospital -  Listen to this emcrit podcast  on management of a patient in traumatic arrest with Irish Road Racing doctor and RAGE team member, John Hinds.  Be sure to read the commentary, because there is an excellent discussion/debate bringing up important considerations for management of traumatic arrest.

Traumatic arrest patients usually do not need meds to facilitate intubation, but as an aside last week one of our trauma colleagues brought up whether we should be using ketamine instead of etomidate

Photo credit: http://inkrose98.deviantart.com/art/Car-Crash-2-254652116

when intubating trauma patients (especially hypotensive ones) in our ED.   I highly recommend this critical review posted last week by the SGEM about ketamine's undeserved bad reputation.  You might just make it your go-to in your next trauma patient even if you suspect intracranial pathology.

What blood products should we be giving to our patients?  A recent body of research from the THOR consortium (Traumatic Hemostasis and Oxygenation Research which includes St. Louis Children's Hospital PICU attending Phil Spinella), suggests whole blood.  Here is a link to the THOR website and articles of interest published by the consortium.

Last week during conference we asked the FOAMed world via twitter for input on CPR in traumatic arrest.  The response was largely negative.  Steve Carroll of @embasic mentioned potential use of REBOA.  For those of you unfamiliar with this device here is a description of the procedure and current evidence regarding its use from the Hennepin County site HQMeded.  If you are still interested, here is  an amazing story recounted on emcrit of prehospital REBOA use for a pelvic fracture. 

And finally... if you still have not watched Cliff Reid's talk on Making Things Happen on leading a resuscitation, do it now.  You will not regret it.

Traumatic vertebral artery injury: If you need a basic review of the talk given by our surgery colleagues, you can read the East Guidelines on Blunt Cerebrovascular Injury.  If you are wondering about the data on the sensitivity of CTA for detection of blunt cerebrovascular injury, you can listen to a podcast by the SGEM here.  Finally, our own blog took on the subject of whether vascular imaging is mandated in the presence of a cervical seatbelt sign, read what we had to say here.   

Navigating the politics of innovation: When I think about what I like about FOAMed, it is that it is a a bottom --> up innovation.  As we learned from Dr. Andrew Knight's talk last week, one of the barriers to dissemination of innovation is top-down decision making with the expectation of bottom-up use.  This is important when thinking about how to effect culture change, but also useful when thinking about managing patient expectations.  I think two good reads on how to talk to patients regarding management decisions are this article in Wired about David Newman and the NNT as a method for data translation, and the "Ed in the ED" blog as a discussion forum on difficult patient conversations.

Wild Style, the epitome of quick-thinking-calm-under-pressure

... and a little on Cognitive Overload : I highly recommend this lecture from Air Force pararescuer Mike Lauria on enhancing cognition and critical decision making in acute care that was shared on the emcrit blog.   Take a Deep Breath.


Enjoy,
Maia Dorsett (@maiadorsett), PGY-3

Antibiotics for Mandible Fractures?

Clinical Scenario:

You’re working a busy Saturday overnight, and the traumas are rolling in. You’ve just finished packaging up your patient with an abdominal GSW for the OR, and they’re bringing back a new patient before the stretcher is even flipped over. He’s a 25 year-old male, presenting to the ED after being in an altercation with some friends of friends. He was hit in the face during the fistfight. He is complaining of left-sided jaw pain and facial swelling. He is able to open his jaw to a reasonable degree, but uncomfortably. There is no apparent intra-oral injury. CT max/face shows multiple minimally-displaced fractures of the left mandibular ramus and paramental region.

Luckily for you the ENT consult resident is still in the department from seeing your last patient with a complicated ear lac. She evaluates the patient with her senior and looks over the images. The patient will need surgical repair, but is OK for discharge with close pre-op follow-up next week. They recommend mouthwash, nasal spray, analgesia, and antibiotics.

Clinical question:

When are prophylactic antibiotics indicated in mandibular fractures, and how effective are they are preventing infection?

3D CT recon of minimally-displaced mandible fractures. Image from MD Consult.

@WUSTL_EM FOAMed Digest #7: Best of the Best of the Best Sir! ...With Honors

To build on my “Intro to FOAMed” lecture from Tuesday, I thought I would use the Digest this week to highlight some of the highest-quality resources out there for those of you just dipping your toes into the FOAMy goodness. You can’t go wrong adding these to your Feedly. Well-referenced, expert review, open discussion with prompt response – they’re really setting the bar for the FOAMed world.

And don’t worry – in the spirit of FOAMed the lecture and slides will be posted as soon as the video editing is done.

Now come on in, the water’s fine!

Three Stars:

1. Academic Life in EM (ALiEM) continues to be one of the paragons of the FOAMed community. Check out this “Diagnose on Sight” case from this week – don’t want to give it away, but you will see it time and time again during your Children’s shifts. Make note of the reference list and pre-publication review from a practicing clinician. Supremely high quality.

2. I must credit my inspiration for this FOAMed Digest – the LITFL Review from Life in the Fast Lane. Curated by some of the sharpest tacks around, it’s a great way to get familiar with the variety of resources out there. Lots of good stuff this time around, including links to Amal Mattu’s EKG video review of QT prolongation, the latest edition of FOAMCast (all about the spleen!), and the St. Emlyn’s view of the new NICE guidelines for managing acute heart failure.

EXTRA CREDIT: If you need help keeping up with the EM primary literature, the Research & Reviews in the Fastlane segment is a great place to start!

3. EM Lyceum takes the “flipped classroom” concept to the next level. Every month or so, they publish a series of clinical questions focused on a particular topic. This time, it was trauma. The point is to ponder those questions, discuss them in a group, and maybe even do your own research. The EM Lyceum group then publishes the best evidence-based answers they could find in an exceptionally well-referenced summary. Pearl from this month: Bust out the PCC for ICH on warfarin, but no good evidence for PCC in your “average” coagulopathic trauma patient.  

...And We All Fall Down... Eventually : Nonpharmacologic pain management for hip fractures in the elderly?

Your patient is an elderly male with history of dementia and multiple medical comorbidities who is sent to the emergency department after a fall from standing. He complains of left hip pain and his X-rays demonstrate a comminuted intertrochanteric left hip fracture. Since the elderly and demented constitute an at-risk population for inadequate analgesia as well as increased risk of fall, respiratory depression and delirium from polypharmacy, you wonder what nonpharmacologic pain control interventions may supplement your pain control management for this patient?

Clinical question: 

Are nonpharmacologic pain control interventions effective in treating pain associated with hip fracture? Do nonpharmacologic pain control interventions reduce the need for opiates in patients with hip fracture?

The Literature: 

Several studies have examined the efficacy of skin traction (foam boot connected to weight via pulley) versus position of comfort (pillow support) for pain relief in patients with various hip fractures. In two randomized studies, skin traction showed no benefit over pillow support:
The first study, published in 2001, was a randomized study enrolling 100 participants. They compared skin traction with a 5lb weight versus pillow support. The authors found that patients who were treated with pillow support required less pain medication and reported statistically significantly lower pain scores prior to surgery (after overnight stay awaiting operative intervention) than their traction treated counterparts (p 0.04). They had an average reduction of pain score of 2.82 points versus a reduction of 1.76 points. The average age of patients in the study was 78 and nearly half had intertrochanteric hip fractures (other half were femoral neck fractures). The study was limited in that they excluded demented patients in their study as they were felt unable to demonstrate adequate understanding of the pain scale and reliably report pain scores.
The second study, released in 2010, included 108 patients randomized to either weighted traction, unweighted traction apparatus or pillow support. Similarly, they observed no difference in pain control between pillow and weighted traction. However, unweighted traction had a statistically significant improvement in pain control compared to the other two. They attributed this to a placebo effect as it provided no actual support of the fracture fragments and did not restrict movement.
Neither study reported negative outcomes associated with pillow treatment, however both observed minor negative outcomes with skin traction either weighted or unweighted. These included blistering, pressure sores and neurapraxia.

Take home: 

- At least two studies demonstrate no improvement in pain control by employing skin traction over pillow support. 
- Moreover, while the pillow group had no reported negative outcomes related to treatment, the skin traction groups in both studies reported wounds, blistering, nerve compression, and pain with application of the treatment. 
- In this population with advanced age, comorbid illness, and potentially limited ability to sense or communicate discomfort with a boot, these minor problems could develop important long term sequelae.
- My treatment plan for the next elderly hip fracture: Pillow support + adequate pharmacologic analgesia + consideration for local nerve blocks. 

References:
1) Rosen, JE et al, “Efficacy of preoperative skin traction in hip fracture patients: a prospective, randomized study,” 2001. Journal of Orthopedic Trauma. Vol. 15(2) 81-85.
2) Sayqi, B et al, “Skin traction and placebo effect in the preoperative pain control in patients with collum and intertrochanteric femur fractures.” 2010 Bulletin of the NYU Hospital for Joint Diseases. Vol. 68(1) 15 - 17.


Contributed by Sara Manning, PGY-3

#FOAMed Digest No. 4: Butter My Biscuit, Baby

Welcome back, to the brand new edition of the WUEMR FOAMed Digest. Get out your Tintinalli’s and strap in, because we’re going back to basics today. It’s all about the bread and butter. The things any PGY-2 setting off to an overnight Saturday shift in the Deuce should have down cold…yet us seniors still screw up on the daily.

FOAMed…ENGAGE!

Three Stars:

1. If my last shift at Children’s is any indication, the season is upon us – pharyngitis in every exam room. Casey Parker over at Broome Docs (a blog authored by EPs & GPs practicing in rural Australia), presents a magnificent summary of the data surrounding rapid strep swabs, antibiotic use for symptom relief, and antibiotic use for preventing secondary complications of strep. As always, be sure to check out the original literature for yourself. And don’t miss Minh Le Cong’s excellent counterpoint in the comments, which is also well-referenced.

2. What’s your record for most C-collars cleared in one shift? (When you hit double-digits, then we can talk.) The best tools in our arsenal for clearing C-spine in low-risk patients remain the Canadian C-spine and NEXUS instruments. But which one should you use? Do you even remember which criteria belong in each rule, or do you find yourself trying to apply the “Canadi-EXUS” criteria, like I do? Luckily for us, Alayna Hawling at BoringEM authored an excellent rundown and comparison – with a pretty flowchart!

3. As much as you want to start the fist-pumping and beer-chugging as soon as you drop that tube past the cords, your work with the intubated patient is not done, my friend! We’ve already touched on our persistently poor rates of achieving adequate analgesia & sedation in the intubated patient. Another part of quality post-intubation care is knowing what to do if your ventilated patient acutely decompensates. Check out Chris Cresswell’s summary of the DOTTS mnemonic over at EM Tutorials.

(EXTRA CREDIT: He also included a link to Scott Weingart’s notes regarding care of the crashing ventilated patient, which are well worth a look.)

Oldie But Goodie:

There’s been some e-mail discussion lately among our attendings regarding the best way to clean lacs prior to closure. Back in February, Ken Milne at the Skeptic’s Guide (along with Eve Purdy, a rockstar med student and creator of the excellent Manu et Corde blog) published a piece dedicated to breaking down the dogma of management of simple lacerations. Tap water vs sterile water, sterile gloves vs clean gloves, to sew or not to sew…it’s all covered here. Plus there’s links to other excellent FOAMed resources regarding wound care dogma.

F(FN)OAMed:

The good folks over at EB Medicine recently published a stem-to-stern guide to UTI diagnosis and management in the ED, all based on best available evidence. A bit lengthier than your average blog post, but incredibly high-yield and well worth your time. It’s a bit difficult for me to place a direct link here, but you can find it simply by logging into your account at EBMedicine, following the link to browse issues of Emergency Medicine Practice, and opening the July 2014 issue on UTI.
(As always, contact your friendly neighborhood Social Media Committee member if you need help obtaining access to EB Medicine resources.)

The Gunner Files:

1. Hard to get through a Deuce shift without breaking out the prochlorperazine at least once. We’ve all seen patients get jittery, agitated, or downright whacky following its use. Does Benadryl help? A PharmD expert at ALiEM has a good lit review of the topic.

2. Short and sweet: some diabetic medications are more likely to cause harmful hypoglycemia after overdose than others. Quick table-based rundown over at ALiEM.

3. It is asthma season, and you may find yourself in the worst-case-asthma-scenario of impending need for intubation. Check out this post from The Kings of County regarding care for the sick asthmatic, including intubation and mechanical ventilation issues.

4. FOAMed is taking the world by storm! Does the UK College of Emergency Medicine launching a dedicated FOAMed site mean it’s officially gone mainstream? Don’t worry – we were all into FOAMed before it was cool. But seriously, check out this vodcast on diagnostics in EM, and not feel quite so much increase in sphincter tone when Carpenter or Cohn pimp you on likelihood ratios or Bayesian analysis.

5. Another classic from the Skeptic’s Guide, this time addressing another oh-so-common ED complaint: renal colic. Fluids? Flomax? Any good evidence for either? In news that will surprise no one, Ken Milne is skeptical.

Never stop learning,

Sam Smith, PGY-3

Blunt Abdominal Trauma in Pediatric Patients: A Clinical Decision Rule

A school-age child was brought to the ED by the mother following involvement in an MVC during which the child was restrained with a lap belt.  The child initially complained of abdominal pain while eating, but currently has no complaints, stable vital signs, and a benign abdominal exam.  The mother is concerned and wonders if her child should get imaging.  This prompts you to investigate whether there are any evidence based clinical decision rules for imaging in pediatric blunt abdominal trauma.

Clinical question: 

Do all children with blunt abdominal trauma necessitate abdominal imaging?  Is there a clinical decision rule that can help guide physician and parent shared-decision making when weighing risks vs benefit in evaluation of pediatric patients following blunt abdominal trauma?

Literature:

Injuries secondary to blunt abdominal trauma contribute to a large degree of morbidity in the pediatric patient population.  In assessing these patients following trauma, CT scans have become the reference standard for diagnostic of traumatic injury.  However, we must also weigh the risk of exposing patients to increased dosage of radiation and increasing their risk of radiation-induced malignancy.  This is especially true in the pediatric population given their rapidly developing bodies as well as their propensity to have a continued lifetime of exposure to medical radiation through future diagnostics.  

Clinicians, especially those not accustomed to regularly seeing pediatric patients, trauma patients, or more specifically pediatric trauma patients, often (anecdotally) err on the side of obtaining advanced imaging to assess patients following blunt abdominal trauma.  Dr. James Holmes and his colleagues in the PECARN (Pediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network) group derived a clinical decision rule to help guide decision making when considering imaging in the pediatric patients.  Using a large, prospective study in 20 EDs, they identified a 7 point rule based solely on history and physical data to help risk stratify the pediatric blunt abdominal patient.  In patients who have no evidence of abdominal wall trauma or a seatbelt sign, a GCS >14, no abdominal tenderness on PE, no thoracic wall trauma, no complaint of abdominal pain, no absence or decreased breath sounds, and no vomiting, the risk of intra-abdominal injury requiring intervention is extremely low (0.1%).  

While these findings require external validation before likely widespread use, they have benefit for current ED practitioners for several reasons.  First, they used a patient oriented outcome of injury requiring intervention rather than a diagnostic outcome of any intra-abdominal injury, so that some patients who perhaps had injury but went on to have a stable clinical course and never received imaging were not a source of bias.  Secondly, their 7 findings were based solely on history and physical findings, something that is available to any clinician regardless of location or resources.  This eliminated the exclusion of validity to centers able to perform FAST scans or obtain more rapid lab results.  It also likely further decreased the “miss rate” for significant intra-abdominal injury when the clinical decision rule is supplemented by these diagnostic studies.  Finally, their rule is not meant as a hard “rule” to force a physician’s hand in obtaining a CT on a patient who carries 1 or 2 of their H&P risk factors.  It is meant to guide the conversation and critical decision process in weighing the radiation exposure risk versus the inherent injury risk when deciding how to continue the workup of the presenting child.  0.1% is a lower risk of injury the risk of a radiation induced malignancy in a young child.  However, as more risk factors accumulate, that may mitigate the difference in risk percentage, increasing the possible benefit of obtaining the CT.

Take home:

All patients, especially pediatric patients are sensitive to the ionizing radiation of medical imaging.  Risk stratifying pediatric patients with decreased likelihood of significant intra-abdominal injury can help physicians to have informed discussions with patients and their guardians and help to decrease the number of CT scans ordered on low risk patients and their exposure to unnecessary radiation.

References:

1) Holmes, JF, et al.  Identifying Children at Very Low Risk of Clinically Important Blunt Abdominal Injuries.  Annals of Emergency Medicine.  2013. 62: 107-16

Kindly contributed by Michael Galante, PGY-3.