Lactate Clearance Predicts Survival Among Patients in the Emergency Department with Severe Sepsis

Introduction: Lactate clearance has been implicated as a predictor of mortality among emergency department (ED) patients with severe sepsis or septic shock. We aimed to validate prior studies showing that lactate clearance during the ED stay is associated with decreased mortality. Methods: Retrospective dual-centered cross-sectional study using patients identified in the Yale-New Haven Hospital Emergency Medicine sepsis registry with severe sepsis or septic shock who had initial lactate levels measured in the ED and upon arrival (<24 hours) to the hospital floor. Lactate clearance was calculated as percent of serum lactate change from ED to floor measurement. We compared mortality and hospital interventions between patients who cleared lactate and those who did not.  Results: 207 patients (110 male; 63.17±17.9 years) were included. Two reviewers extracted data with 95% agreement. One hundred thirty-six patients (65.7%) had severe sepsis and 71 patients (34.3%) had septic shock. There were 171 patients in the clearance group and 36 patients in the non-clearance group. The 28-day mortality rates were 15.2% in the lactate clearance group and 36.1% in the non-clearance group (p<0.01). Vasopressor support was initiated more often in the non-clearance group (61.1%) than in the clearance group (36.8%, p<0.01) and mechanical ventilation was used in 66.7% of the non-clearance group and 36.3% of the clearance group (p=0.001).  Conclusion: Patients who do not clear their lactate in the ED have significantly higher mortality than those with decreasing lactate levels. Our results are confirmatory of other literature supporting that lactate clearance may be used to stratify mortality-risk among patients with severe sepsis or septic shock.

Lactate Clearance Predicts Survival Among Patients in the Emergency Department with Severe Sepsis

Introduction: Lactate clearance has been implicated as a predictor of mortality among emergency department (ED) patients with severe sepsis or septic shock. We aimed to validate prior studies showing that lactate clearance during the ED stay is associated with decreased mortality. Methods: Retrospective dual-centered cross-sectional study using patients identified in the YaleNew Haven Hospital Emergency Medicine sepsis registry with severe sepsis or septic shock who had initial lactate levels measured in the ED and upon arrival (<24 hours) to the hospital floor. Lactate clearance was calculated as percent of serum lactate change from ED to floor measurement. We compared mortality and hospital interventions between patients who cleared lactate and those who did not. Results: 207 patients (110 male; 63.17±17.9 years) were included. Two reviewers extracted data with 95% agreement. One hundred thirty-six patients (65.7%) had severe sepsis and 71 patients (34.3%) had septic shock. There were 171 patients in the clearance group and 36 patients in the non-clearance group. The 28-day mortality rates were 15.2% in the lactate clearance group and 36.1% in the non-clearance group (p<0.01). Vasopressor support was initiated more often in the nonclearance group (61.1%) than in the clearance group (36.8%, p<0.01) and mechanical ventilation was used in 66.7% of the non-clearance group and 36.3% of the clearance group (p=0.001). Conclusion: Patients who do not clear their lactate in the ED have significantly higher mortality than those with decreasing lactate levels. Our results are confirmatory of other literature supporting that lactate clearance may be used to stratify mortality-risk among patients with severe sepsis or septic shock

The Shock Index as a Predictor of Vasopressor Use in Emergency Department Patients with Severe Sepsis

Introduction: Severe sepsis is a leading cause of non-coronary death in hospitals across the United States. Early identification and risk stratification in the emergency department (ED) is difficult because there is limited ability to predict escalation of care. In this study we evaluated if a sustained shock index (SI) elevation in the ED was a predictor of short-term cardiovascular collapse, defined as vasopressor dependence within 72 hours of initial presentation.Methods: Retrospective dual-centered cross-sectional study using patients identified in the Yale-New Haven Hospital Emergency Medicine sepsis registry.Results: We included 295 patients in the study with 47.5% (n¼140) having a sustained SI elevation in the ED. Among patients with a sustained SI elevation, 38.6% (54 of 140) required vasopressors within 72 hours of ED admission contrasted to 11.6% (18 of 155) without a sustained SI elevation (p¼0.0001; multivariate modeling OR 4.42 with 95% confidence intervals 2.28-8.55). In the SI elevation group the mean number of organ failures was 4.0 6 2.1 contrasted to 3.2 6 1.6 in the non-SI elevation group (p¼0.0001).Conclusion: ED patients with severe sepsis and a sustained SI elevation appear to have higher rates of short-term vasopressor use, and a greater number of organ failures contrasted to patients without a sustained SI elevation. An elevated SI may be a useful modality to identify patients with severe sepsis at risk for disease escalation and cardiovascular collapse. [West J Emerg Med. 2014;15(1):60–66.

The Shock Index as a Predictor of Vasopressor Use in Emergency Department Patients with Severe Sepsis

Introduction: Severe sepsis is a leading cause of non-coronary death in hospitals across the United States. Early identification and risk stratification in the emergency department (ED) is difficult because there is limited ability to predict escalation of care. In this study we evaluated if a sustained shock index (SI) elevation in the ED was a predictor of short-term cardiovascular collapse, defined as vasopressor dependence within 72 hours of initial presentation. Methods: Retrospective dual-centered cross-sectional study using patients identified in the Yale-New Haven Hospital Emergency Medicine sepsis registry. Results: We included 295 patients in the study with 47.5% (n¼140) having a sustained SI elevation in the ED. Among patients with a sustained SI elevation, 38.6% (54 of 140) required vasopressors within 72 hours of ED admission contrasted to 11.6% (18 of 155) without a sustained SI elevation (p¼0.0001; multivariate modeling OR 4.42 with 95% confidence intervals 2.28-8.55). In the SI elevation group the mean number of organ failures was 4.0 6 2.1 contrasted to 3.2 6 1.6 in the non-SI elevation group (p¼0.0001). Conclusion: ED patients with severe sepsis and a sustained SI elevation appear to have higher rates of short-term vasopressor use, and a greater number of organ failures contrasted to patients without a sustained SI elevation. An elevated SI may be a useful modality to identify patients with severe sepsis at risk for disease escalation and cardiovascular collapse. [West J Emerg Med. 2014;15(1):60–66.

Prehospital Evaluation of Effusion, Pneumothorax, &amp; Standstill (PEEPS): Point-of-care Ultrasound in Emergency Medical Services

Introduction: In the United States, there are limited studies regarding use of prehospital ultrasound (US) by emergency medical service (EMS) providers. Field diagnosis of life-threatening conditions using US could be of great utility. This study assesses the ability of EMS providers and students to accurately interpret heart and lung US images.Methods: We tested certified emergency medical technicians (EMT-B) and paramedics (EMT-P) as well as EMT-B and EMT-P students enrolled in prehospital training programs within two California counties. Participants completed a pre-test of sonographic imaging of normal findings and three pathologic findings: pericardial effusion, pneumothorax, and cardiac standstill. A focused one-hour lecture on emergency US imaging followed. Post-tests were given to all EMS providers immediately following the lecture and to a subgroup one week later.Results: We enrolled 57 prehospital providers (19 EMT-B students, 16 EMT-P students, 18 certified EMT-B, and 4 certified EMT-P). The mean pre-test score was 65.2%±12.7% with mean immediate post-test score of 91.1%±7.9% (95% CI [22%-30%], p&lt;0.001)). Scores significantly improved for all three pathologic findings. Nineteen subjects took the one-week post-test. Their mean score remained significantly higher: pre-test 65.8%±10.7%; immediate post-test 90.5%±7.0% (95% CI [19%-31%], p&lt;0.001), one-week post-test 93.1%±8.3% (95% CI [21%-34%], p&lt;0.001).Conclusion: Using a small sample of EMS providers and students, this study shows the potential feasibility for educating prehospital providers to accurately identify images of pericardial effusion, pneumothorax, and cardiac standstill after a focused lecture

Prehospital Evaluation of Effusion, Pneumothorax, &amp; Standstill (PEEPS): Point-of-care Ultrasound in Emergency Medical Services

Introduction: In the United States, there are limited studies regarding use of prehospital ultrasound (US) by emergency medical service (EMS) providers. Field diagnosis of life-threatening conditions using US could be of great utility. This study assesses the ability of EMS providers and students to accurately interpret heart and lung US images.Methods: We tested certified emergency medical technicians (EMT-B) and paramedics (EMT-P) as well as EMT-B and EMT-P students enrolled in prehospital training programs within two California counties. Participants completed a pre-test of sonographic imaging of normal findings and three pathologic findings: pericardial effusion, pneumothorax, and cardiac standstill. A focused one-hour lecture on emergency US imaging followed. Post-tests were given to all EMS providers immediately following the lecture and to a subgroup one week later.Results: We enrolled 57 prehospital providers (19 EMT-B students, 16 EMT-P students, 18 certified EMT-B, and 4 certified EMT-P). The mean pre-test score was 65.2%±12.7% with mean immediate post-test score of 91.1%±7.9% (95% CI [22%-30%], p&lt;0.001)). Scores significantly improved for all three pathologic findings. Nineteen subjects took the one-week post-test. Their mean score remained significantly higher: pre-test 65.8%±10.7%; immediate post-test 90.5%±7.0% (95% CI [19%-31%], p&lt;0.001), one-week post-test 93.1%±8.3% (95% CI [21%-34%], p&lt;0.001).Conclusion: Using a small sample of EMS providers and students, this study shows the potential feasibility for educating prehospital providers to accurately identify images of pericardial effusion, pneumothorax, and cardiac standstill after a focused lecture