Factores pronósticos en el paciente anciano con sepsis en urgencias

NOTA 520 8 La sepsis es un proceso relacionado con la respuesta inmunológica a nivel sistémico y su presencia condiciona el manejo inicial y por tanto el pronóstico. En los últimos años los servicios de urgencias han ido cobrando un protagonismo en la detección y en la puesta en marcha de las estrategias terapéuticas iniciales, ya que suponen la puerta de entrada de múltiples patologías agudas, incluida la sepsis. La detección precoz de situaciones de riesgo va a ser determinante ya que permitirá seleccionar los pacientes que precisan una estrategia terapéutica más agresiva. Por ese motivo, se han planteado varias escalas clínicas que permitan una estratificación a pie de cama, sin embargo no están exentas de limitaciones. La escala MEDS ha sido la más usada en los servicios de urgencias por su sencillez y su buena correlación con la mortalidad, sin embargo, en los últimos años, ha cobrado especial importancia la escala PIRO. Otras escalas como APACHE o SOFA, si bien han demostrado su utilidad en la UCI, no lo han hecho en los servicios de urgencias. En los últimos años, los biomarcadores de respuesta inflamatoria e infección (BMRIeI) están adquiriendo mayor importancia debido a su capacidad para detectar la sepsis y sus distintos grados de gravedad, así como pronosticar la probabilidad de bacteriemia o muerte... NOTA 520 8 La sepsis es un proceso relacionado con la respuesta inmunológica a nivel sistémico y su presencia condiciona el manejo inicial y por tanto el pronóstico. En los últimos años los servicios de urgencias han ido cobrando un protagonismo en la detección y en la puesta en marcha de las estrategias terapéuticas iniciales, ya que suponen la puerta de entrada de múltiples patologías agudas, incluida la sepsis. La detección precoz de situaciones de riesgo va a ser determinante ya que permitirá seleccionar los pacientes que precisan una estrategia terapéutica más agresiva. Por ese motivo, se han planteado varias escalas clínicas que permitan una estratificación a pie de cama, sin embargo no están exentas de limitaciones. La escala MEDS ha sido la más usada en los servicios de urgencias por su sencillez y su buena correlación con la mortalidad, sin embargo, en los últimos años, ha cobrado especial importancia la escala PIRO. Otras escalas como APACHE o SOFA, si bien han demostrado su utilidad en la UCI, no lo han hecho en los servicios de urgencias. En los últimos años, los biomarcadores de respuesta inflamatoria e infección (BMRIeI) están adquiriendo mayor importancia debido a su capacidad para detectar la sepsis y sus distintos grados de gravedad, así como pronosticar la probabilidad de bacteriemia o muerte..

Current situation of sepsis care in Spanish emergency departments

Objective. To describe the approach to the patients with suspected sepsis in the Spanish emergency department hospitals (ED) and analyze whether there are differences according to the size of the hospital and the number of visits to the emergency room. Method. Structured survey of those responsible for the 282 public EDs that serve adults 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. It was asked about assistance and management in the emergency room in the care of patients with suspected sepsis. The results are compared according to hospital size (large = 500 beds vs medium-small <500) and influx to the emergency room (discharge = 200 visits / day vs medium-low <200). Results. A total of 250 Spanish EDs responded (89%). Sepsis protocols are available in 163 (65%) EDs median weekly sepsis treated ranged from 0-5 per week in 39 (71%) ED, 6-10 per week in 10 (18%), 11-15 per week in 4 (7%), and more than 15 activations per week in 3 centers (3.6%). The criteria used for sepsis diagnosis were the qSOFA/SOFA in 105 (63.6%) of the hospitals, SIRS in 6 (3.6%), while in 49 (29.7%) they used both criteria simultaneously. In 79 centers, the sepsis diagnosis was computerized, and in 56 there were tools to help decision-making. 48% (79 of 163) of the EDs had data on bundles compliance. In 61% (99 of 163) of EDs there was training in sepsis and in 56% (55 of 99) it was periodic. Considering the size of the hospital, large hospitals participated more frequently as recipients of patients with sepsis and had an infectious, sepsis and short-stay unit, a microbiologist and infectious disease specialist on duty. Conclusion. Most EDs have sepsis protocols, but there is room for improvement. The computerization and development of alerts for diagnosis and treatment still have a long way to go in EDs

Incidence, clinical characteristics, risk factors and outcomes of meningoencephalitis in patients with COVID-19

We investigated the incidence, clinical characteristics, risk factors, and outcome of meningoencephalitis (ME) in patients with COVID-19 attending emergency departments (ED), before hospitalization. We retrospectively reviewed all COVID patients diagnosed with ME in 61 Spanish EDs (20% of Spanish EDs, COVID-ME) during the COVID pandemic. We formed two control groups: non-COVID patients with ME (non-COVID-ME) and COVID patients without ME (COVID-non-ME). Unadjusted comparisons between cases and controls were performed regarding 57 baseline and clinical characteristics and 4 outcomes. Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biochemical and serologic findings of COVID-ME and non-COVID-ME were also investigated. We identified 29 ME in 71,904 patients with COVID-19 attending EDs (0.40‰, 95%CI=0.27-0.58). This incidence was higher than that observed in non-COVID patients (150/1,358,134, 0.11‰, 95%CI=0.09-0.13; OR=3.65, 95%CI=2.45-5.44). With respect to non-COVID-ME, COVID-ME more frequently had dyspnea and chest X-ray abnormalities, and neck stiffness was less frequent (OR=0.3, 95%CI=0.1-0.9). In 69.0% of COVID-ME, CSF cells were predominantly lymphocytes, and SARS-CoV-2 antigen was detected by RT-PCR in 1 patient. The clinical characteristics associated with a higher risk of presenting ME in COVID patients were vomiting (OR=3.7, 95%CI=1.4-10.2), headache (OR=24.7, 95%CI=10.2-60.1), and altered mental status (OR=12.9, 95%CI=6.6-25.0). COVID-ME patients had a higher in-hospital mortality than non-COVID-ME patients (OR=2.26; 95%CI=1.04-4.48), and a higher need for hospitalization (OR=8.02; 95%CI=1.19-66.7) and intensive care admission (OR=5.89; 95%CI=3.12-11.14) than COVID-non-ME patients. ME is an unusual form of COVID presentation (<0.5‰ cases), but is more than 4-fold more frequent than in non-COVID patients attending the ED. As the majority of these MEs had lymphocytic predominance and in one patient SARS-CoV-2 antigen was detected in CSF, SARS-CoV-2 could be the cause of most of the cases observed. COVID-ME patients had a higher unadjusted in-hospital mortality than non-COVID-ME patients

Safety and Revisit Related to Discharge the Sixty-one Spanish Emergency Department Medical Centers Without Hospitalization in Patients with COVID-19 Pneumonia. A Prospective Cohort Study UMC-Pneumonia COVID-19

Background: Information is needed on the safety and efficacy of direct discharge from the emergency department (ED) of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. Objectives: The objectives of the study were to study the variables associated with discharge from the ED in patients presenting with COVID-19 pneumonia, and study ED revisits related to COVID-19 at 30 days (EDR30d). Methods: Multicenter study of the SIESTA cohort including 1198 randomly selected COVID patients in 61 EDs of Spanish medical centers from March 1, 2020, to April 30, 2020. We collected baseline and related characteristics of the acute episode and calculated the adjusted odds ratios (aOR) for ED discharge. In addition, we analyzed the variables related to EDR30d in discharged patients. Results: We analyzed 859 patients presenting with COVID-19 pneumonia, 84 (9.8%) of whom were discharged from the ED. The variables independently associated with discharge were being a woman (aOR 1.890; 95%CI 1.176-3.037), age 1200/mm(3) (aOR 4.667; 95%CI 1.045-20.839). The EDR30d of the ED discharged group was 40.0%, being lower in women (aOR 0.368; 95%CI 0.142-0.953). A total of 130 hospitalized patients died (16.8%) as did two in the group discharged from the ED (2.4%) (OR 0.121; 95%CI 0.029-0.498). Conclusion: Discharge from the ED in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia was infrequent and was associated with few variables of the episode. The EDR30d was high, albeit with a low mortality

Fiebre en el viajero retornado del trópico.

The increase in international travel, the growing presence of arbovirus vectors in our country, and notifications of haemorrhagic fever such as the current outbreak of Ebola in D.R. Congo and the cases of Crimea-Congo haemorrhagic fever in our country have again cast the spotlight on tropical diseases Isolating suspected cases of highly contagious and lethal diseases must be a priority (Haemorrhagic fever, MERS-CoV). Assessing the patient, taking a careful medical history based on epidemiological aspects of the area of origin, activities they have carried out, their length of stay in the area and the onset of symptoms, will eventually help us, if not to make a definitive diagnosis, at least to exclude diseases that pose a threat to these patients. Malaria should be ruled out because of its frequency, without forgetting other common causes of fever familiar to emergency doctors

Impacto organizativo de la pandemia COVID-19 de 2020 en los servicios de urgencias hospitalarios españoles: resultados del estudio ENCOVUR

Objetivo: Estimar el impacto del brote pandémico de COVID-19 en diversos aspectos organizativos de los servicios de urgencias hospitalarios (SUH) españoles e investigar si difirió en función de la comunidad autónoma, tamaño del hospital e incidencia local de la pandemia. Método: Encuesta a los responsables de los 283 SUH españoles de uso público, quienes valoraron el impacto de la pandemia en aspectos organizativos, disponibilidad de recursos, y bajas del personal durante marzo-abril de 2020, diferenciando dicho impacto por quincenas. Los resultados se analizaron en conjunto, por comunidad autónoma, según tamaño del hospital y según incidencia local de la pandemia. Resultados: Se recibieron 246 encuestas (87% de los SUH españoles). La mayoría de SUH reorganizaron el triaje, primera asistencia y observación y habilitó nuevos espacios específicos para pacientes con sospecha de COVID-19. Un 83% aumentó dotación enfermera (sin diferencias entre grupos) y un 59% la dotación de médicos (más frecuente en hospitales grandes y zonas de alta incidencia). El recurso que más escaseó fue el test diagnóstico de SARS-CoV-2 (55% del tiempo insuficiente con cierta o mucha frecuencia), seguido de mascarillas FPP2-FPP3 38%), batas impermeables (34%) y espacio asistencial (32%). Hubo más del 5% de médicos/enfermería/otro personal de baja el 20%/19%/16% del tiempo. Estos déficits fueron máximos la segunda quincena de marzo, excepto para los test diagnósticos (primera quincena de marzo). Los SUH de grandes centros tuvieron menos escasez de tests diagnósticos, y los de zonas de alta incidencia pandémica más profesionales de baja. Existieron marcadas diferencias en todas estos déficits entre comunidades autónomas, no siempre concordantes con el grado de afectación pandémica en cada comunidad. Conclusiones: La pandemia COVID-19 generó cambios estructurales en los SUH, que sufrieron una escasez considerable en ciertos recursos, con diferencias marcadas entre comunidades autónomas

Analysis of the evolution of patients attended in Spanish emergency departments during the first wave of the pandemic

Fundamento. Describir el número de consultas, total y por COVID-19, atendidas en servicios de urgencias hospitalarios (SUH) españoles durante marzo y abril de 2020, compararlo con el mismo periodo del año anterior, cuantificar el cambio de actividad asistencial e investigar la posible influencia del tamaño del hospital y de la seroprevalencia provincial de COVID-19. Métodos. Estudio transversal. Se envió una encuesta a todos los responsables de SUH españoles del sistema público de salud sobre el número de consultas atendidas durante marzo y abril de 2019 y de 2020. Se calculó el cambio de actividad asistencial por comunidad autónoma, y se comparó en función del tamaño del hospital y del impacto provincial de la pandemia. Resultados. Participaron el 66% de los 283 SUH. Se observó un descenso del 49,2% de las consultas totales (solo los SUH de Castilla-La Mancha mostraron un descenso inferior al 30%) y del 60% de las consultas no-COVID-19 (solo los SUH de Asturias y Extremadura mostraron un descenso inferior al 50%). el cambio de actividad asistencial no difirió en función del tamaño del hospital, pero sí en relación al impacto provincial de la pandemia, con una correlación directa respecto al descenso de actividad no-COVID-19 (a mayor impacto, mayor descenso; R2=0,05; p=0,002) e inversa en relación a la actividad global (a mayor impacto, menor descenso; R2=0,05; p=0,002). Conclusiones. Durante la primera ola pandémica descendió el número de consultas en los SUH, si bien dicho descenso no se explica únicamente por la incidencia local de la pandemia

Incidence, clinical, risk factors and outcomes of Guillain-Barré in Covid-19.

We diagnosed 11 Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) cases among 71,904 COVID patients attended at 61 Spanish emergency departments (EDs) during the 2-month pandemic peak. The relative frequency of GBS among ED patients was higher in COVID (0.15‰) than non-COVID (0.02‰) patients (odds ratio [OR] = 6.30, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 3.18-12.5), as was the standardized incidence (9.44 and 0.69 cases/100,000 inhabitant-years, respectively, OR = 13.5, 95% CI = 9.87-18.4). Regarding clinical characteristics, olfactory-gustatory disorders were more frequent in COVID-GBS than non-COVID-GBS (OR = 27.59, 95% CI = 1.296-587) and COVID-non-GBS (OR = 7.875, 95% CI = 1.587-39.09) patients. Although COVID-GBS patients were more frequently admitted to intensive care, mortality was not increased versus control groups. Our results suggest SARS-CoV-2 could be another viral infection causing GBS. ANN NEUROL 2021;89:598-603

Incidence, Clinical Characteristics, Risk Factors and Outcomes of Acute Coronary Syndrome in Patients With COVID-19: Results of the UMC-19-S1010.

There is a lack of knowledge about the real incidence of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) in patients with COVID-19, their clinical characteristics, and their prognoses. We investigated the incidence, clinical characteristics, risk factors, and outcomes of ACS in patients with COVID-19 in the emergency department. We retrospectively reviewed all COVID-19 patients diagnosed with ACS in 62 Spanish emergency departments between March and April 2020 (the first wave of COVID-19). We formed 2 control groups: COVID-19 patients without ACS (control A) and non-COVID-19 patients with ACS (control B). Unadjusted comparisons between cases and control subjects were performed regarding 58 characteristics and outcomes. We identified 110 patients with ACS in 74,814 patients with COVID-19 attending the ED (1.48% [95% confidence interval {CI} 1.21-1.78%]). This incidence was lower than that observed in non-COVID-19 patients (3.64% [95% CI 3.54-3.74%]; odds ratio [OR] 0.40 [95% CI 0.33-0.49]). The clinical characteristics of patients with COVID-19 associated with a higher risk of presenting ACS were: previous coronary artery disease, age ≥60 years, hypertension, chest pain, raised troponin, and hypoxemia. The need for hospitalization and admission to intensive care and in-hospital mortality were higher in cases than in control group A (adjusted OR [aOR] 6.36 [95% CI 1.84-22.1], aOR 4.63 [95% CI 1.88-11.4], and aOR 2.46 [95% CI 1.15-5.25]). When comparing cases with control group B, the aOR of admission to intensive care was 0.41 (95% CI 0.21-0.80), while the aOR for in-hospital mortality was 5.94 (95% CI 2.84-12.4). The incidence of ACS in patients with COVID-19 attending the emergency department was low, around 1.48%, but could be increased in some circumstances. Patients with COVID-19 with ACS had a worse prognosis than control subjects with higher in-hospital mortality