Consensus statement on abusive head trauma in infants and young children

Abusive head trauma (AHT) is the leading cause of fatal head injuries in children younger than 2 years. A multidisciplinary team bases this diagnosis on history, physical examination, imaging and laboratory findings. Because the etiology of the injury is multifactorial (shaking, shaking and impact, impact, etc.) the current best and inclusive term is AHT. There is no controversy concerning the medical validity of the existence of AHT, with multiple components including subdural hematoma, intracranial and spinal changes, complex retinal hemorrhages, and rib and other fractures that are inconsistent with the provided mechanism of trauma. The workup must exclude medical diseases that can mimic AHT. However, the courtroom has become a forum for speculative theories that cannot be reconciled with generally accepted medical literature. There is no reliable medical evidence that the following processes are causative in the constellation of injuries of AHT: cerebral sinovenous thrombosis, hypoxic-ischemic injury, lumbar puncture or dysphagic choking/vomiting. There is no substantiation, at a time remote from birth, that an asymptomatic birth-related subdural hemorrhage can result in rebleeding and sudden collapse. Further, a diagnosis of AHT is a medical conclusion, not a legal determination of the intent of the perpetrator or a diagnosis of murder. We hope that this consensus document reduces confusion by recommending to judges and jurors the tools necessary to distinguish genuine evidence-based opinions of the relevant medical community from legal arguments or etiological speculations that are unwarranted by the clinical findings, medical evidence and evidence-based literature

Hemophilia and child abuse as possible causes of epidural hematoma: case report Hemofilia e abuso infantil como possíveis causas de hematoma extradural: relato de caso

INTRODUCTION: Head trauma is an important consequence of child abuse. Specific pathophysiological mechanisms in child abuse are responsible for the ''whiplash shaken-baby syndrome'', which would favour the occurrence of intracranial hemorrhages. CASE REPORT: We report the case of a child who developed epidural hematoma following minor-intensity head trauma. Initial diagnosis of child abuse was made, but subsequent investigation led to the diagnosis of hemophilia A. CONCLUSION: Even though epidural hematoma is not closely associated with child abuse, this aethiology must always be considered when the reported trauma mechanism is out of proportion to the magnitude of the encountered lesions.<br>INTRODUÇÃO: Traumatismo crânio-encefálico é importante conseqüência de abuso infantil. Mecanismos fisiopatológicos específicos do abuso infantil são responsáveis pela ''whiplash shaken-baby syndrome'', o que favoreceria o aparecimento de hemorragias intracranianas. RELATO DE CASO: Relatamos o caso de uma criança que desenvolveu hematoma extradural após trauma de pequena intensidade. Foi feito diagnóstico inicial de abuso infantil, mas investigações subseqüentes levaram ao diagnóstico de hemofilia A. CONCLUSÃO: Embora o hematoma extradural não esteja intimamente relacionado com abuso infantil, esta etiologia deve ser sempre considerada quando o mecanismo de trauma relatado estiver fora de proporção com as lesões encontradas

Comparison of meperidine plus midazolam and fentanyl plus midazolam in procedural sedation: A double-blind, randomized controlled trial

This double-blind, randomized, prospective study was conducted to compare the analgesic and sedative efficacy of fentanyl and meperidine in orthopedic closed reduction of fractures and dislocations undertaken in the emergency department. Seventy consecutive adult patients with fractures or dislocations suitable for reduction were randomized to receive fentanyl (1 mcg/kg; n=36) or meperidine (0.5 mg/kg; n=34) in combination with midazolam (0.02 mg/kg). Vital signs and alertness scale scores of the patients were monitored. The Visual Analog Scale (VAS) was used to determine the degree of pain. There was no statistically significant difference between the VAS mean scores of the fentanyl and meperidine groups (t test, P=.772). The need for additional analgesic drugs was significantly more frequent in patients receiving meperidine (P=.018). No adverse events, such as hypotension or respiratory depression, were noted. Euphoria occurred in one patient in the fentanyl group. Although dose requirements differ, fentanyl and meperidine provide effective and reliable analgesia in closed reduction of fractures and dislocations