Wednesday, November 25, 2009

QOD 11 25 09

Which of the following statements accurately describes the risk of hepatic failure following acetaminophen overdose?

A. If N-acetylcysteine is started more than 2 hours post-ingestion, the risk of hepatic failure begins to increase.
B. If N-acetylcysteine is started more than 4 hours post-ingestion, the risk of hepatic failure begins to increase.
C. If N-acetylcysteine is started more than 6 hours post-ingestion, the risk of hepatic failure begins to increase.
D. If N-acetylcysteine is started more than 8 hours post-ingestion, the risk of hepatic failure begins to increase.
E. The risk of hepatic failure is dependent on the amount of ingestion, not the time before antidotal therapy is started.

Following ingestion, acetaminophen is rapidly absorbed from the gastrointestinal tract. It has a relatively low volume of distribution (0.8-1.0 L/kg) and is 25% protein-bound. The half-life of acetaminophen is approximately 1.5-2.5 hours, although it can be slightly prolonged at supratherapeutic concentrations.

Following ingestion, approximately 4% of the ingested acetaminophen is excreted unchanged in the urine, while the remainder is metabolized in the liver. In adults, 45-55% of acetaminophen is glucuronidated, while 20-30% is sulfonated. In pediatric patients, however, sulfation is the primary pathway, and glucuronidation is a minor component. The remainder of acetaminophen is metabolized via the cytochrome P450 isoenzyme CYP2E1 to form a substance called N-acetyl-para-benzoquinoneimine (NAPQI). Normally, the body's endogenous glutathione supplies are able to bind to and reduce NAPQI, resulting in renal excretion in the form of cysteine or mercaptopuric acid conjugates. In the setting of overdose, however, the NAPQI production exceeds the body's endogenous glutathione supply, and hepatotoxicity can result.




Acetaminophen's toxicity is due to the metabolism to NAPQI by the cytochrome P450 isoenzyme CYP2E1. Thus, any xenobiotic that induces the P450 isoenzyme CYP2E1 can theoretically increase the risk for acetaminophen-induced hepatotoxicity. Perhaps one of the best-studied agents for inducing CYP2E1 is ethanol. Thus, chronic ethanol consumption leads to increased CYP2E1 activity and, in theory, subsequently increases the risk of hepatotoxicity (see Special Populations below). In contrast, the co-ingestion of ethanol with acetaminophen may result in inhibition of the microsomal oxidation of acetaminophen, thereby providing some degree of protection from acetaminophen-induced hepatotoxicity during acute intoxication. The strongest risk factor for developing hepatotoxicity, however, is the time from a toxic ingestion until the antidote, N-acetylcysteine, is administered. The risk of hepatotoxicity if N-acetylcysteine is started within the first eight hours of the overdose is exceedingly low, while the risk increases substantially with delays longer than eight hours.



Answer: D

Tuesday, November 17, 2009

Kevin J. Pfeiffer





Kevin J. Pfeifer New YorkFire Department of New York2001
Lt. Kevin J. Pfeifer worked out of Engine 33 on Great Jones Street in Manhattan. He was a Paramedic for NY Hospital and St. Vincent’s Hospital in Manhattan. Kevin loved life! He was an expert sailor and had a private pilot’s license. Kevin always wanted to be like his brother Deputy Chief Joseph, and he adored his sister, Mary Ellen.
Helen Pfeifer

Monday, November 16, 2009

New York-Presbyterian
EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES

Continuing

Medical

Education

NYP/Weill Cornell

Tuesday, December 1, 2009 4:00-8:00 pm

NYP/Weill Cornell Campus

Room M-107

Four Hour Call Review

4:00-5:20 pm Adult Medical Call Review with Dr.Carter

5:20-5:30 pm Break

5:30-6:45 pm Trauma Call Review with Dr.Eachempati

6:45-6:55 pm Break

6:55-8:00 pm Pediatric Call Review with Dr.Lupica

Please RSVP if you plan on attending

ANY QUESTIONS OR IDEAS

PLEASE CONTACT CME COORDINATOR

STEVE SAMUELS EMT-P 516-383-7248

SSAMUELS@OPTONLINE.NET

QOD 11 16 09

Which risk factor was found to be associated with a significant increase in mortality from

cocaine overdose by a medical examiner surveillance study?

a. Suicides

b. Age over 50

c. Ambient temperature > 31.1° C (88° F)

d. Concomitant opioid use

e. HIV status


Hyperthermia is the vital sign abnormality that correlates most with

fatality in cocaine users. There are numerous case reports of hyperthermia-related deaths with or

without rhabdomyolysis after cocaine use. Cocaine causes hyperthermia in several ways.

Cocaine increases heat production through psychomotor agitation via its CNS effects. Cocaine also controls

the dopamine-modulated heat-regulatory centers of the hypothalamus.94 Peripherally, cocaine hampers

heat dissipation by vasoconstriction of the vasculature. In addition, high ambient temperatures are

associated with an increase in mortality from cocaine overdose. In a medical examiner surveillance study

in New York City, it was found that significantly more deaths were due to cocaine overdoses on hot days

than on other days. The mean daily mortality began to increase when maximum temperature equaled or

exceeded 31.1° C (88° F). These findings are consistent with data demonstrating that the survival rate of

cocaine-poisoned dogs fell from 100% to 57% when ambient temperature was increased from –5° C to

5° C.

Answer: C

Saturday, November 14, 2009

QOD 11 13 09

Which of the following statements is true of heterotopic pregnancies?

A. They have a lower mortality rate than ectopic pregnancies.
B. They have similar risk factors to those of ectopic pregnancies.
C. They occur more commonly in natural cycles than with assisted reproductive treatment.
D. They present with acute rupture very infrequently.

Heterotopic pregnancy (HP) is the coexistence of an intrauterine and an extrauterine pregnancy. The majority of cases of HP are thought to arise from multiple ovulations. Although its incidence was once considered rare (1/30,000 pregnancies), the incidence has increased significantly since the advent of assisted reproductive technology (ART). The true incidence of HP is unknown but has been estimated to be as high as 1.5% in women treated with ART, which is 100 times higher than HP that occurs with natural cycles.

Risk factors for HP are similar to those for ectopic pregnancy and include pre-existing tubal disease, pelvic inflammatory disease, prior ectopic pregnancy, prior tubal surgery, use of intrauterine devices, and ART. Patient presentations vary, and some may even be asymptomatic. Presenting signs and symptoms include lower abdominal pain (30-80%), vaginal bleeding (approximately 30%) and adnexal mass (43%), enlarged uterus, and hemorrhagic shock. Approximately 50% of heterotopic pregnancies present with acute rupture.

Heterotopic pregnancy presents a major diagnostic challenge for the emergency physician as well as the obstetrician. It is common to think that an intrauterine pregnancy on ultrasound rules out an ectopic pregnancy. However, an HP still may exist and, if left undiagnosed or if the diagnosis is delayed, there may be dire maternal consequences. Soriano et al. found that patients with HP were more likely to have hemodynamic instability, to have more free fluid in the pelvis, and to require more blood transfusions than patients with ectopic pregnancy.

Early diagnosis of HP is essential. The majority of heterotopic pregnancies are diagnosed between 5 and 8 weeks (70%), while 20% are diagnosed between 9 and 10 weeks, and the remaining 10% after 11 weeks. The serum beta-hCG levels are not helpful because they are usually high and may in fact appropriately increase in serial examinations.

Because 95% of heterotopic pregnancies are located either in the fallopian tubes or the ovaries, transvaginal ultrasound is superior to transabdominal ultrasound in making the diagnosis of HP. It is important to keep HP in the differential diagnosis for those pregnant patients who present with shock or continue to complain of severe abdominal pain with or without vaginal bleeding. It is crucial that the adnexal structures be visualized. Consider HP if there is an IUP but the adnexa are poorly visualized or abnormal and there is free fluid in the pelvis.

Treatment of the ectopic pregnancy depends on the patient's clinical presentation. The literature states that laparoscopy for salpingectomy or salpingotomy is the standard treatment for these patients. In stable patients, the use of potassium chloride, methotrexate, RU486, or prostaglandins is useful in the treatment of the ectopic pregnancy but raises concern for possible compromise of the intrauterine gestation.

The survival rate for the intrauterine pregnancy has been documented to be approximately 66% in patients who undergo laparoscopic surgery to remove the ectopic pregnancy. Maternal hypovolemia due to hemorrhagic shock increases the likelihood of demise of the intrauterine pregnancy. The maternal mortality rate for HP has been cited as being just under 1% as compared to ectopic pregnancy, which carries a mortality rate of 0.3/1000. This larger mortality rate likely is due to delays in diagnosis.


Answer: B

FW: A Preventing Chronic Disease article referral for you

Preventing Chronic Disease article referral for you

Hello,

You may want to see this recent article from Preventing Chronic Disease, the online e-journal:
http://www.cdc.gov/pcd/issues/2009/oct/08_0246.htm?s_cid=pcd64a118_e

Friday, November 13, 2009

FW: Requested DocAlert: Chocolate Is Associated with Lower Mortality Following First Myocardial Infarction

Chocolate Is Associated with Lower Mortality Following First Myocardial Infarction



Chocolate Is Associated with Lower Mortality Following First MI

Amount of chocolate consumption was related inversely to cardiac-related mortality during an 8-year follow-up

Several studies have suggested that chocolate, perhaps in a process mediated by its antioxidant content, protects the heart (JW Gen Med Jul 10 2007 and JW Gen Med Sep 23 2003). A Swedish team identified 1169 nondiabetic patients who were hospitalized with initial nonfatal myocardial infarctions. Detailed food histories for the preceding 12 months were completed by 86% of patients; participants were followed for an additional 8 years.

Compared with patients who never ate chocolate, those who ate chocolate less than once monthly suffered 27% less cardiac-related mortality (after multivariate adjustments); risk was 44% lower for weekly chocolate eaters and 66% lower for those who ate chocolate two or more times weekly. Nonfatal adverse cardiac events, strokes, and total mortality, however, were not related clearly to chocolate consumption. Consuming other sweets (e.g., cookies, cakes, ice cream) had no relation to cardiac mortality.

Comment: The strengths of this study are its size and long-term follow-up. The main weakness is that chocolate consumption was assessed only once, during hospitalization for initial MIs, and not during follow-up. To me, the most interesting result of the study is that chocolate strongly protected against cardiac mortality but not against adverse cardiac events. The same finding has been reported for ω-3 fatty acid supplements, which suggests that the primary beneficial effect of both chocolate and ω-3 fatty acid supplements is in suppressing arrhythmias.

Anthony L. Komaroff, MD

Published in Journal Watch General Medicine September 3, 2009

Citation:
Janszky I et al. Chocolate consumption and mortality following a first acute myocardial infarction: The Stockholm Heart Epidemiology Program. J Intern Med 2009 Sep; 266:248. [Medline® Abstract]

Copyright © 2009. Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.

The above message comes from "Journal Watch", who is solely responsible for its content.

Tuesday, November 10, 2009

Emailing: Letter from the Commissioner to Nation’s Doctors on H1N1 Vaccine


Letter from the Commissioner to Nation's Doctors on H1N1 Vaccine

November 10, 2009

Dear Healthcare Professional,

I am writing first to thank you for your extraordinary efforts during the 2009 H1N1 influenza outbreak.

As this new infectious disease sweeps through communities across the country, you must juggle your usual patient care responsibilities with a special role in influenza response. Delays in vaccine delivery and the persistence of myths about vaccination have not made your job any easier. Thank you for rising to this public health challenge.

I am also writing to provide information that can be helpful as you talk to patients about the 2009 H1N1 influenza vaccines -- the best tools we have to prevent severe illness and death caused by the virus.

As the Commissioner of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), I am pleased to have this opportunity to communicate with you directly at this key moment in time.

The Department of Health and Human Services is working with influenza vaccine manufacturers and state and local public health officials to make these vaccines widely available. So far, more than 41 million doses of the 2009 H1N1 vaccine have been allocated to the states for distribution across the country, and more is becoming available every day.

Some of your patients may be asking how the FDA, the manufacturers, and the scientific community can have confidence in vaccines that were available just six months after the 2009 H1N1 virus emerged. Understanding more about the manufacturing and approval process for these vaccines should help you to answer their questions.

Every year, FDA and vaccine manufacturers follow a series of steps to make a new influenza vaccine targeted to the three main circulating strains of influenza. These steps have produced effective and very safe vaccines time and again, adding up to hundreds of millions of doses administered in the United States alone.

We followed this same path for the 2009 H1N1 vaccines.

Making the 2009 H1N1 Vaccine

First, scientists at laboratories in the United States and elsewhere modified the 2009 H1N1 virus into a version suitable to be used as the "seed" for the development of vaccines. The process that was followed is similar in every respect to that which is employed every year for the preparation of seasonal influenza vaccines, as slightly different strains appear regularly each year. For the 2009 H1N1 virus, modified strains suitable for vaccine manufacturing were created and provided to influenza vaccine manufacturers by late May.

Next, companies began manufacturing the 2009 H1N1 vaccines in the same factories where they are licensed to manufacture seasonal influenza vaccines – using the same equipment and the same testing procedures. FDA inspects these plants at least once a year to assure that quality controls are followed at every step in the production process. FDA's oversight covers both those facilities that make the inactivated vaccines (the "flu shot") and those that make live attenuated viral vaccine (the "nasal spray").

A critical part of influenza vaccine production is the growth of the vaccine strain in specially produced eggs. After inoculation of the eggs, the virus replicates, creating hundreds of thousands of copies of itself. It is the efficiency of this growth that determines how much vaccine can be produced and how quickly. The material harvested from these eggs is then further processed into the vaccines that you administer to your patients.

As recently as a few years ago, egg shortages would have prevented summertime and fall production of a vaccine against a new strain of influenza. Fortunately, this year, manufacturers could tap into a reserve supply of eggs made by additional flocks of chickens. These flocks were available under contracts put in place for just this purpose – to respond to a possible pandemic.

At the end of July, FDA sought public input. We convened a public meeting of FDA's expert vaccine advisory committee to review the agency's approach to approval of the 2009 H1N1 vaccines. This committee includes scientists, physicians, public health officials and a consumer representative. The committee supported making the vaccines according to the same approach used every year for the seasonal influenza vaccines.

The next step was to develop a tool to accurately measure the amount of vaccine antigen that was being produced. Scientists from the United States, United Kingdom, Australia, Japan, and other nations, working together as part of the World Health Organization, developed the reagents needed to assure the proper amount of antigen goes into each dose of vaccine.

On September 15, after reviewing applications from manufacturers similar to those submitted each year for licensed seasonal vaccine, FDA licensed four vaccines against the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus.

The agency found that all of the appropriate documentation had been submitted, and all of the standards had been met. In fact, had this new virus emerged a few months earlier, it could have been included as one of the three strains in the 2009 seasonal vaccine. In this key respect, although the strain of the 2009 H1N1 virus is new, the 2009 H1N1 influenza vaccines are not.

Over the summer, the National Institutes of Health and vaccine manufacturers initiated clinical trials to determine the dose and number of doses needed to induce an optimal immune response. The good news is that just as for seasonal vaccine, one dose of H1N1 vaccine will likely be protective for healthy adults, the elderly, and older children. For children ages nine and younger, two doses of the H1N1 vaccine will likely be optimal, also similar to seasonal vaccine. No serious adverse events attributable to the vaccine have emerged during the clinical trials, which have so far included over 3600 patients at NIH-supported institutions alone.

Monitoring Vaccine Safety

We are now in a position never before experienced in the history of influenza. Just as a new and serious virus is spreading widely around the country, causing hospitalizations and deaths, a vaccine is becoming available to help prevent infection and protect the public. This accomplishment is the result of the efforts of hundreds of scientists across the world in the private and public sectors. Although a gap still remains between the demand for the vaccine and the currently available supply, this is the first time in history that any vaccine has been available at the time that an influenza pandemic has struck.

We are not cutting any corners. Just as for seasonal influenza vaccine, no lot of the 2009 H1N1 vaccine can be used until it has been carefully evaluated and released as sterile and potent by both the manufacturer and by the FDA.

In addition, the FDA and other agencies are looking for any unexpected, rare, serious adverse events and are quickly investigating concerns. We are also collaborating with our global counterparts to share information and experience. Should any safety concerns arise, we will evaluate them thoroughly and bring them to the public's attention quickly.

I encourage you to report any adverse effects that you believe are linked to any vaccine, including the 2009 H1N1 influenza vaccine, to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (http://vaers.hhs.gov/index). Other resources for 2009 H1N1 influenza, including a detailed description of vaccine safety efforts, are online at http://www.flu.gov/.

It is likely that most families in the United States will be touched by H1N1 influenza this year. Fortunately, many will experience mild illness. Others will endure unspeakable tragedy. The benefits of preventing serious consequences from infection with the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus far outweigh the risks associated with vaccination. All Americans, and especially pregnant women and others at high risk of severe influenza infection, should seriously consider the recommendation for vaccination to help protect themselves and their loved ones.

Thank you for your critical work during this challenging time.

Sincerely,

/s/

Margaret A. Hamburg, M.D.
Commissioner of Food and Drugs


Monday, November 9, 2009

USS NEW YORK CAP





Maybe this hat should become the official cap for all
New York First Responders. After the commissioning of the USS New York this weekend it is being seen on a lot of heads.




USS New York LPD 21 Ship's Crest

Dark blue and gold, the colors traditionally associated with the Navy, represent the sea and excellence. The crossed swords represent the US Navy and Marine Corps. The red is for sacrifice and valor and the white recalls purity of purpose. The gray chevron and two vertical bars represent the bow of LPD 21 and The Twin Towers respectively. They are conjoined to emphasize the use of 24 tons of steel recovered from the World Trade Center, to construct the 7.5 ton bow stem of the USS New York. The phoenix rising personifies the hope and determination of this nation to rebuild and regroup to fight terrorism. The shield on the phoenix's breast honors the New York City Fire Department, New York City Police Department and the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. The vertical red stripe is for the Fire Department, the dark blue stripe is the traditional blue for the Police Department and the light blue stripe is for thePort Authority Police Department, The Celeste is taken from the patch of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. The Celeste also alludes to costal waters and the port of New York. The red drops represent blood shed and the ultimate sacrifice made by the men and women of 9/11. The stars commemorate the three battle stars the USS New York Battleship earned during World War 2. The border of the shield is adapted from the New York State Seal.The sunburst represents the crown of the Statue of Liberty. They represent the seven seas and contenents of the world and also suggest a direct connection to the littoral missions of the USS New York anywhere in the world, past and present. The mountains and lakes surrounded by the maple leaves represent the natural beauty of the State of New York.Source, Northrop Grumman LPD 21 Christening

QOD 11 9 09

Which statement regarding conducted electrical


weapons (ie, Tasers®) is true?

a. They are known to cause cardiac arrhythmias.

b. They cause involuntary contractions of regional skeletal muscles leading to immobilization of the victim.

c. They utilize only DC currents.

d. Patients with a Taser® injury should always be admitted for cardiac telemetry.

With increased use of conducted electrical weapons (ie, Tasers®) by law enforcement agents and by civilians

seeking personal protection, emergency clinicians can expect to see more patients in the ED with

Taser® injuries. Tasers® use compressed nitrogen to fire 2 metallic darts up to 35 feet and transmit an

electrical impulse through up to 2 inches of clothing. The Taser® causes involuntary contractions of the

regional skeletal muscles and makes it impossible for the target to move voluntarily. The peak voltage

across the target’s body is approximately 1200 V (delivered in rapid pulses over 5 seconds), and the average current is approximately 2.1 mA.

The electric shock delivered by the Taser® is neither pure AC nor pure DC and is probably similar to rapid,

low-amplitude DC shocks. After reports of deaths in police custody following

Taser® use, concern has been raised regarding its safety. However, a recent small prospective study

by Ho et al found no evidence of Taser®-induced cardiac arrhythmias, ECG changes, or electrolyte

abnormalities. Additionally, a prospective series involving 218 patients shot with the original Taser® in

the early 1980s described 3 deaths secondary to cardiac arrest; however, all 3 of these patients had high

levels of phencyclidine (PCP) in their blood, and this was cited as the cause of death. The authors

concluded that the death rate in their series was no higher than that reported for PCP toxicity alone.

Although data regarding the effects of the Taser® are limited, it appears most healthy subjects may be

safely discharged from the ED after dart removal and evaluation for any other injuries. Although

some authors recommend an ECG in patients who have been shot with the Taser®, no current evidence

supports this practice


Answer: b






No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.425 / Virus Database: 270.14.53/2486 - Release Date: 11/07/09 07:38:00

CME Yearly plan

New York-Presbyterian
EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES

Continuing Medical Education

Dear Fellow EMS Professionals,

In an effort to help you plan your schedules, I am posting the dates for the following months for the 4 hour CME sessions. As you can see it will be a cyclical schedule to enable as many people as possible to attend.

Dr. Wallace Carter will continue to run the Adult Call Reviews on the first Tuesday* in March, June, September and December from 4:00 pm till 5:30 pm in room M-107.
Dr. Eachempati will have Trauma call Review from 5:30 pm till 6:45 pm.
Dr. Lupica will have Pediatric Call Review from .6:45 pm till 8:00 pm.

October 7, 2009 Wednesday
November 5 , 2009 Thursday

December 1, 2009 Tuesday*
January 6, 2010 Wednesday
February 4, 2010 Thursday

March 2, 2010 Tuesday*
April 7, 2010 Wednesday
May 6 , 2010 Thursday

June 1, 2010 Tuesday*
July 7, 2010 Wednesday
August 5, 2010 Thursday

September 7, 2010 Tuesday*

ANY QUESTIONS OR IDEAS
PLEASE CONTACT CME COORDINATOR
STEVE SAMUELS EMT-P 516-383-7248
SSAMUELS@OPTONLINE.NET

Sunday, November 8, 2009

USS NEW YORK

V-22 OSPREY



MEDICAL WARD





MAN THE SHIP





CORPMAN NATHANIEL MITCHELL aka TOUR GUIDE




ON THE FLIGHT DECK





THE HELM


Saturday, November 7, 2009

QOD 11 4 09

What is the preferred method of removal of corneal foreign bodies?


a. Removal with an 18-gauge needle
b. Removal with a moistened cotton-tipped swab
c. Removal with an optical burr
d. Outpatient removal within one week by ophthalmologist

A great variety of intraocular foreign bodies have been described, including metal fragments, wood, plastic, and others. Once determined that the injury to the eye is a simple foreign body and resultant corneal abrasion, removal of the foreign body should be performed under slit lamp visualization to provide consistent and stable removal of the offending irritant.

Corneal foreign bodies can often be safely removed in the ED. An initial attempt to remove an irritant from the pediatric eye may be performed with a moistened cotton-tipped swab. If this effort is unsuccessful, the use of a needle is indicated to remove the foreign body. It is important to reassure the patient and parents that the needle does not go into the eye, but merely rests on the surface. Attach a standard 18-gauge needle to a 3 mL syringe for stability. Some prefer to bend the needle shaft 30° to facilitate the approach to the eye. The foreign body can then be gently lifted off the surface of the cornea. Once the foreign body is dislodged, use a moist cotton swab to remove it from the surface of the eye, if necessary. If a rust ring remains following removal of a metallic foreign body, this may also be removed in the ED with either the needle or a burr. It is also acceptable to schedule ophthalmology follow up for removal within 24–48 hours.

Following foreign body removal, reexamine the eye for signs of ocular penetration. Pay particular attention for Seidel's sign, a leak of fluid that appears to be a dark stream of fluid on top of a green fluorescein background. After the foreign body is removed and signs of ocular perforation are excluded, the injury may be treated as a simple corneal abrasion

Answer: B (as we all know a moistened cotton-tipped swab is rarely successful, however)


USS NEW YORK COMMISSIONED



Today I had the honor of being present for the commissioning ceremony of the USS New York, LPD 21. The ship's motto is:

" Strength Forged Through Sacrifice , Never Forget ".


I have been to many other events in life: graduations, weddings; today I felt like I witnessed the birth of a ship when it came to life and was officially commissioned.

Find out more about this event and the ship by visiting the web site.

P.S. My Thanks to Nathaniel Mitchell

Visit the web site; http://www.ussnewyork.com/

Friday, November 6, 2009

QOD 11 6 09

Which one of the following postoperative complications has been most commonly associated with the use of coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG) involving cardiopulmonary bypass ("on pump" CABG)?

A.

Adrenal insufficiency.

B.

Cerebral dysfunction.

C.

Gastric ulceration.

D.

Reactive thrombocytosis




During the past 30 years, coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG) primarily was performed with the use of cardiopulmonary bypass ("on pump") with cardioplegic arrest. Historically, on-pump CABG was shown to improve ischemic symptoms and, in selected patients, prolong survival. In the mid-1990s, interest emerged in performing CABG without the use of cardiopulmonary bypass (off pump), in order to reduce postoperative complications associated with the use of cardiopulmonary bypass, including generalized systemic inflammatory response, cerebral dysfunction, myocardial depression, and hemodynamic instability.



Answer: B








No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.423 / Virus Database: 270.14.39/2469 - Release Date: 11/04/09 07:37:00

QOD 11 6 09


Which one of the following postoperative complications has been most commonly associated with the use of coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG) involving cardiopulmonary bypass ("on pump" CABG)?

A.

Adrenal insufficiency.

B.

Cerebral dysfunction.

C.

Gastric ulceration.

D.

Reactive thrombocytosis




During the past 30 years, coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG) primarily was performed with the use of cardiopulmonary bypass ("on pump") with cardioplegic arrest. Historically, on-pump CABG was shown to improve ischemic symptoms and, in selected patients, prolong survival. In the mid-1990s, interest emerged in performing CABG without the use of cardiopulmonary bypass (off pump), in order to reduce postoperative complications associated with the use of cardiopulmonary bypass, including generalized systemic inflammatory response, cerebral dysfunction, myocardial depression, and hemodynamic instability.



Answer: B








No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.423 / Virus Database: 270.14.39/2469 - Release Date: 11/04/09 07:37:00

Thursday, November 5, 2009

November CME Journal

November Journal CME Article
From Larrey to the Present Day
It was over two hundred years ago when Napoleon’s chief surgeon, Dr. Dominique Jean Larrey,
suggested that not all patients on the battlefield should be treated the same. Dr. Larrey, who is also credited with
developing the concept of the ambulance, felt that some patients stood a better chance of surviving if they were
delivered promptly from the field to a medical facility, some patients could wait, and others were so severely
injured that they were certain to die even with prompt care. What he needed was a way to identify patients as
belonging to one of these categories and to facilitate their care accordingly. And so he suggested that medical
providers should be able to sort (in French, “triage”) patients according to the severity of their injuries.
“Those who are dangerously wounded should receive the first attention, without regard to rank
or distinction. They who are injured in a less degree may wait until their brethren-in-arms, who
are badly mutilated, have been operated and dressed, otherwise the latter would not survive
many hours, rarely until the succeeding day.” – D.J. Larrey, MD (1797)
In the centuries that have passed, this concept has been refined, its military use has been improved, and it
has been adopted for use in the civilian sector, including the development of such formalized triage programs as
START. And while these programs have improved our ability to rapidly classify patients as ambulatory,
moderately or severely injured or moribund, we have all experienced the patient who just doesn’t quite fit.
At the steam pipe explosion in Midtown, the only immediate fatality initially would have been
appropriately categorized as a green tag since she walked away from the scene despite her complaints of
shortness of breath. Isn’t there a better way to fit her into our triage and transport algorithms?
What do you do with the asthmatic who is too short of breath to walk, in moderate distress, yet has a
respiratory rate less than thirty (30)? Should she really be listed as a yellow tag and placed side-by-side with the
ankle injuries? What about the older male who is pale, cool, diaphoretic, and complaining of chest pain? What
about the child who has a pulse but has just stopped breathing?
November 2009 – Journal CME Newsletter page 6 of 15
The difficulty with most triage systems is that they focus on the very types of patients that Dr. Larrey first
focused on during the Napoleonic wars – the “dangerously wounded.” Triage focuses on the most common
emergencies during mass casualty incidents – the wounded – but it typically lacks the flexibility to deal with the
medical emergencies that are also a common part of any disaster. And it focuses on adults, while pediatric
patients may easily be involved in the incident.
For some time, the Office of Medical Affairs (led by Dr. David Prezant and Dr. Dario Gonzalez) has been
working with EMS Operations, the Bureau of Training, REMAC / REMSCO, pediatric disaster experts, and
others to develop a way to appropriately deal with such patients while holding to the basic principle of triage – to
provide the best care to the most patients in the setting of limited resources.
In this month’s article, we will review the principles that are being added to our triage algorithms,
describe the logic behind these changes, and provide examples of how these new concepts will impact upon onscene
operations at the scene of an MCI. Then, in this month’s CME drill and in other training sessions that will
follow, these concepts and the tag that will accompany them will be incorporated into our practice.
Let’s START with a Review
The Simple Triage and Rapid
Transport model of prehospital triage
utilizes four categories into which patients
are classified: green, yellow, red, and black.
This triage model (Figure 1), which has
been used by the FDNY and countless
other EMS agencies around the world, has
the advantage of using very simple, easy to
determine physical assessment findings to
direct patients into one of these four
categories.
Those patients who are able to walk
from the scene are classified as green tags.
The idea is that these patients will have
minimal injuries or complaints and that they are able to wait for a significant period of time before receiving
more definitive medical care. During very large events, this may even include being transported to distant
hospitals to keep from overwhelming facilities closer to the event.
With the green tags having removed themselves from the mix, patients now require a simple physical
assessment, beginning appropriately with the ABCs.
Figure 1: START Triage Algorithm
November 2009 – Journal CME Newsletter page 7 of 15
For those patients who are not breathing, one attempt to open their airway is made. Though they may still
have a pulse, the fact that they cannot maintain their own airway and ventilation would require the use of
resources that just are not available. Therefore, if this one attempt to open their airway is not sufficient to cause
them to start breathing, they are categorized as black.
Patient who are breathing or those who begin breathing after their airway is opened should have their
breathing assessed. Respiratory rates greater than thirty (30) are considered to be signs of critical illness or injury,
and these patients are categorized as red.
Spontaneously breathing patients with respiratory rates less than thirty (30) must then have their
circulation assessed. Remembering that the presence of a radial pulse is an indicator of a systolic blood pressure
of ~80mmHg or higher, patients without a palpable radial pulse are considered to be critically hypotensive and
are categorized as red.
Finally, those patients for whom the assessment of the ABCs does not suggest a critical condition (they
have a patent airway, respirations of 10-30 per minute and a palpable radial pulse) are assessed for significant
neurologic compromise. Patients who despite having intact ABCs cannot follow simple commands are
categorized as red.
And everyone who is left is classified as yellow. This means that this category, by default, includes
patients with non-life threatening injuries, non-ambulatory patients with medical conditions, and pediatric
patients who are unable to walk.
“Overtriage”
One of the recognized problems with the large variety of patients who end up being categorized as yellow
is that the providers who initially triage or later care for these patients often recognize the severity of their
injuries or illness in spite of their having met the criteria for a “yellow tag” or even “green tag.” To deal with this
problem, providers often feel the need to “uptriage” the patient in order to ensure their transport before patients
with less serious conditions.
The act of “uptriage” is certainly well-intended – the provider is trying to ensure that a patient who seems
to be in need of more rapid treatment and transport receives it by moving them into a “higher” category. But the
downside to this act is that the number of patients in that higher category increases – a result known as
“overtriage.”
The problem with overtriage is that, by increasing the number of patients in this higher triage category, it
is likely that the patients who were properly assigned to this category will suffer delays in transport and/or
treatment as the system works to deal with the larger number of patients in this category. And this could result in
further injury or even death among these patients.
This issue was one of the findings in a 2002 article that analyzed the triage of patients in a series of ten
terrorist bombings that occurred between 1969 and 1995. The authors found that overtriage resulted in increased
November 2009 – Journal CME Newsletter page 8 of 15
mortality (death) among the most critically injured patients because the limited resources were devoted to caring
for a larger number of patients: "…overtriage could be as life-threatening as undertriage because of the
inundation of overwhelmed medical facilities with large numbers of critical casualties all at once which may
prevent the timely detection of that small minority with critical injuries who need immediate treatment and
jeopardize their survival." (Frykberg – 2002)
Not Little Adults
As we have discussed in past articles, there are a number of
anatomic and physiologic differences between adult and pediatric patients.
And while a common practice among any of us who have had to triage a
child is to simply “uptriage” them, we have already mentioned why this
may not be the most appropriate act when you consider the overall event.
Where the START triage particularly fails to address pediatric
needs is in its initial steps. Remember that one of the primary causes of
death among pediatric patients is airway obstruction. But the START triage
algorithm would suggest that a child who is not breathing should have their
airway opened and, if they do not spontaneously breathe, they should be
triaged as black. And it is too easy to recall any number of events where
not trying to “at least try something” for a critically injured or dying child
was not a decision that a provider was willing to make (Figure 2).
For these reasons, there have been products developed to specifically address the challenges of pediatric
triage. One of the most popular of these is a product called JumpSTART, a modification to the START triage
algorithm that takes into account the issue of airway obstruction, uses vital signs that are specific to pediatric
patients, and changes the mental status assessment to account for the stranger-anxiety, fear, and language issues
that may prevent a child from “following commands.”
While such products are considered by many to be useful for the triage of a large number of pediatric
patients, these products are also thought to be of limited use when the incident includes a large number of patients
of varying ages. What is needed for such events is a simple-to-use algorithm that will take into consideration the
issues that we have mentioned here while not contributing to the stress and disorder of the scene by requiring
providers to use a variety of different algorithms depending on the age of each patient.
New Triage for New York City
As mentioned in the introduction, the Office of Medical Affairs has been working with a number of
individuals and organizations to improve upon our triage process while maintaining the fundamental principle
that must remain central for any useful triage algorithm: doing the most good for the greatest possible number of
Figure 2: Provider carries a mortally injured
child from the rubble of the Alfred P. Murrah
Federal Building in Oklahoma City, OK
November 2009 – Journal CME Newsletter page 9 of 15
patients. This process included the review of available triage concepts and products, discussions of the issues of
“overtriage” and the reasons behind it, age-specific issues for pediatric patients and issues that are specific to our
City. And just as importantly, the concepts that were developed were then shared with providers such as yourself
in order to receive critical feedback regarding the changes and whether they were felt to be of use in improving
the triage process and addressing providers’ concerns about our current process.
The result of these efforts is a new triage algorithm that we will be teaching throughout the Department,
beginning with this article. Further training will include this month’s skill drill and agency-wide trainings that
will occur as a part of grant funding that the Department received to enhance its disaster preparedness.
But the training cannot stop there, because it is not only FDNY providers who will be providing triage at
the scene of MCIs in this City. So the training materials that are developed will be shared with other EMS
agencies in the City and will be incorporated into multi-agency drills to be held in the future. And this training
will be extended beyond the City limits in order to include those providers who may assist us in the event of a
true disaster, including agencies that may respond as part of mutual aid agreements from surrounding counties
and states.
Enhanced START Triage
What is important to remember about this new triage process is that it is intended to build upon what you
have already been doing for your entire career. The START process forms the foundation of what will now be
Figure 3: Enhanced START Triage Algorithm for New York City
November 2009 – Journal CME Newsletter page 10 of 15
our triage program. And to that process two simple but critical concepts have been added – improved pediatric
triage and a new, intermediate category to address the concept of “overtriage.” With the addition of these two
steps, the new triage algorithm that we will use is as shown in Figure 3 and, as you can see, it is very similar to
START except for those two, very important changes.
While this algorithm may look like it is much more complex, it is so similar to START that there are
really only two changes. This means that your triage process will begin in the exact same way – getting anyone
who is ambulatory to remove themselves from the scene by directing them to a safe area. This will help to
eliminate some of the on-scene confusion and allow for more efficient triage of the remaining victims, will
minimize those moving about the scene other than rescuers, and will prevent further injury to these patients and
even providers.
With the “green” patients removed from the scene, the next priority is to identify those patients for whom
medical care and/or transport would likely be futile. And because of the issue of pediatric airway obstruction that
was mentioned above, this is the first place where an improvement has been added.
Begin by assessing each patient’s respirations. If none are noted, make one attempt to reposition the
patient’s airway. If the patient continues to be apneic (no spontaneous ventilations), they should be categorized as
“black” except for those who are children.
If the patient is a child (which is simply defined as a person who “looks like they are a child”) and
remains apneic after opening the airway, provide five artificial ventilations via bag-valve-mask. There are
certainly children for whom this simple act may be enough to stimulate spontaneous ventilations and, if so, they
should be triaged as “red.” For those children who do not respond to the five ventilations, having provided them
with the treatment for the most likely and reversible cause of death, they should be classified as “black.”
Just as in START triage, the next step is to assess the respiratory rate of all patients with spontaneous
breathing. If the respiratory rate is greater than 30, the patient should be categorized as “red.”
Now remember that the normal respiratory rate of an infant (less than one year of age) is thirty (30) to
sixty (60) breaths per minute. This means that infants are likely to all be categorized as “red.” Though this is an
example of the “overtriage” that was mentioned earlier, the very small number of infants involved in any mass
casualty incident combined with the difficult task of quickly assessing an infant makes this likelihood acceptable.
For those patients with spontaneous respirations at a rate of thirty or less, you should next assess their
radial pulse. If it is absent, they are assumed to be significantly hypotensive and therefore categorized as “red.”
For those with a radial pulse, their mental status should be assessed by asking them to follow a simple
command. Those who cannot are categorized as “red”, while those who can are categorized as “yellow.” But this
is where the second improvement occurs.
All of those patients who should be categorized as “yellow” that you may have previously been tempted
to “uptriage” to “red” now have a new category into which they can be placed. This category is meant to provide
November 2009 – Journal CME Newsletter page 11 of 15
an appropriate category for patients who do not meet the criteria for a “red tag” but whose injuries and/or medical
condition suggests to the on-scene providers that they are in need of more rapid treatment and transport than most
“yellow” patients.
The new “orange” category is meant to include both pediatric and adult patients who are unstable (but not
“red”), potentially unstable, or rapidly deteriorating. Most of these patients will be the medical patients
(respiratory distress, chest pain, asthma exacerbations, children with significant respiratory distress as evidenced
by respiratory rates less than twelve breaths per minute, etc) that would have otherwise been grouped with the
patients whose injuries prevented them from walking. And this category may include patients who would
otherwise be categorized as “yellow” or “red,” at the discretion of the on-scene providers.
And this is probably one of the most potentially exciting and useful parts of this new category – it is not
bound by vital signs or other strict criteria. It allows you to take those patients that you may have been tempted to
“uptriage” to the “red” category and appropriately assign them to a category that will speed their treatment and
transport without “overtriaging” into the “red” group of patients.
New Tag
This new approach to triage obviously would not work if we were to continue to use the same triage tag
that we have been using as part of the standard START triage process. We need a tag with an “orange” category,
at the very least.
The Department has been working to develop such a tag, but also one that allows for rapid documentation
and communication of other relevant information on the scene of a mass casualty incident or disaster. This
information includes initial treatments provided such as the number of nerve agent kits (Duodote or Mark I kits)
administered to the patient and other such useful information. These tags will be introduced as these other
training exercises are put into place in the coming weeks.
Conclusion
Appropriate triage is an absolutely essential component for the management of any mass casualty incident
or disaster scene and has been shown to improve the outcomes of the patients involved in such an incident. Its use
ensures that the limited resources that are available for any such incident are appropriately utilized to provide the
best possible care to the greatest number of patients. And with the addition of the two changes described in this
article, the ability of each and every one of you to ensure that this occurs during such events will increase
dramatically.
Written by: John Freese, M.D. Dario Gonzalez, M.D.
Medical Director of Training / OLMC Borough Medical Director – Manhattan and Bronx
Director of Prehospital Research Medical Director for Rescue / HAZTAC
November 2009 – Journal CME Newsletter page 12 of 15
NOVEMBER 2009 JOURNAL CME QUIZ
1. Which patient is not appropriately categorized “red” under the new triage algorithm to be used in NYC?
a. patient with spontaneous respirations but no palpable radial pulse
b. patient who begins to spontaneously breathe only after having their airway opened
c. child who begins to spontaneously breathe after receiving five artificial ventilations
d. child who is breathing less than thirty times per minute
e. patient who is breathing less than 30/min, has a radial pulse, and cannot follow commands
2. All of these patients may appropriately be categorized as “orange” except:
a. a forty-five year-old patient with orthostatic hypotension and chest pain.
b. a nineteen year-old patient experiencing a moderate asthma exacerbation.
c. a six year-old patient with normal V/S who is able to follow commands with a significant head injury.
d. a twenty-one year-old patient who begins to spontaneously breathe after their airway is repositioned.
e. an eleven year-old with normal V/S, able to follow commands, with inspiratory / expiratory stridor.
3. Whifcih of the following is true of pediatric triage?
a. No programs have been developed to specifically address the issues of pediatric triage.
b. Because children are really no different than adults, there is no need for pediatric-specific triage.
c. JumpSTART is an example of an adult triage program that does not consider pediatric needs.
d. There is no need to adjust vital sign parameters as pediatric vitals signs are similar to those of an adult.
e. The new approach to triage in New York City will provide five ventilations to an apneic “child.”
44. AAs part of the new triage algorithm to be used in New York City, which of the following is the correct
a. age <18 c. looks like an infant e.
b. age <21 d. looks like a child
age <14, consistent with
REMAC protocols
5. The first descriptions of a triage process date back to:
a. the Napoleonic wars c. WWI e. the Vietnam War / Conflict
b. the American Civil War d. WWII
6. The normal respiratory rate for an infant is:
a. 12-20 c. 20-30 e. 30-60
b. 15-25 d. 30-40
7. The result of placing patients into triage categories higher than those to which they should rightfully be
a. overflow c. overload e. overspread
b. overtriage d. overweighing
8. Which of the following is true regarding the initial development of the modern day triage process?
a. It was developed by one of Caesar’s physicians, Dr. Larrey.
b. The physician credited with developing the idea of triage also developed the idea of the ambulance.
c. The concept of triage was designed to ensure that the richest patients were treated first.
d. The concept of triage was designed to ensure that the highest ranking patients were treated first.
e. Triage is the French word term for “bring out your dead.”
9. One of the most common and yet reversible causes of death among pediatric patients is:
a. airway obstruction c. head injuries e. vascular compromise
b. asthma d. myocardial infarction
10. The concept of START triage stands for:
a. Simple Treatment after Rapid Triage d. Sample Triage and Rapid Transport
b. Simple Triage and Related Transport e. Sample Treatment allows Rapid Transport
c. Simple Triage and Rapid Transport
November 2009 – Journal CME Newsletter page 13 of 15
Based on the CME article, place your answers to the quiz on this answer sheet.
Respondents with a minimum grade of 80% will receive 1 hour of Online/Journal CME.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please submit this page only once, by one of the following methods:
• FAX to 718-999-0119 or
• MAIL to FDNY OMA, 9 MetroTech Center 4th flr, Brooklyn, NY 11201
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact the Journal CME Coordinator at 718-999-2790:
• three months before REMAC expiration for a report of your CME hours.
• for all other inquiries.
Monthly receipts are not issued. You are strongly advised to keep a copy for your records.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: if your information is illegible, incorrect
or omitted you will not receive CME credit.
check one:  EMT  Paramedic  _______________
other
________________________________________________
Name
________________________________________________
NY State / REMAC # or “n/a” (not applicable)
________________________________________________
Work Location
________________________________________________
Phone number
________________________________________________
Email address
Submit answer sheet by
the last day of this month.
November 2009
CME Quiz
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Required for
BLS & ALS
providers
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Required for
ALS
providers only
November 2009 – Journal CME Newsletter page 14 of 15
Citywide CME – N

Wednesday, November 4, 2009

Ryan White Act Treatment Extension Act Signed by President Obama

This was from the EMS1 online newsletter.

WASHINGTON — Responders will again have the right to be notified of possible HIV or other life-threatening illness exposure following the approval of the Ryan White Act Treatment Extension Act by President Obama on Friday. The bill, which was passed by Congress last month, includes a provision requiring hospitals to alert EMS workers within 48 hours of exposure to infectious diseases. In addition, the bill allows responders to request a determination as to whether or not a particular patient has an infectious disease.The updated law provides new protections not found in the previous version. When the bill was revised in 2006, mandates requiring the notification of responder health hazards by hospitals were eliminated. EMS and public safety professionals and advocates have since been working to reinstate the notification requirements. While many EMS personnel consider the updates an improvement to previous protocol, the bill holds that the HHS secretary can waive the notification requirement in the case of a federally-declared public emergency.

Decrease in Smoking


The prevalence of smoking in the U.S. has decreased to 20.8% in 2006 from a high of 42% in 1965. [4] Nonetheless, tobacco use is still the most common cause of preventable death and disease in the U.S., accounting for approximately 438,000 premature deaths, 5.5 million years potential life lost and $92 billion in productivity losses annually. [1] [4] Smoking reduces the median survival of smokers on average by 10 years, and beyond the age of 40 each additional year of smoking reduces life expectancy by 3 months. [5] Globally, smoking prevalence is rising in the developing countries, and it is estimated that in the 21st century there will be 1 billion deaths due to tobacco use worldwide unless these trends are reversed. [6] By quitting cigarette smoking, a patient reduces the risk of lung cancer and other diseases by 20% to 90%, and improves survival even among those who quit over the age of 50. [5] Image 2 image Nonetheless, habitual smokers find it extremely difficult to successfully stop smoking. Although 70% of smokers would like to quit, and 40% make at least 1 quit attempt per year, only 3% to 4% of smokers per year are successful in quitting long term on their own. [7]




Significant survival benefit of smoking cessation.2
Adapted from Fiore MC, Jaen CR, Baker TB, et al. Treating Tobacco Use and Dependence: 2008 Update. Clinical Practice Guideline. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Public Health Service; May 2008.
Referenced Articles

4
Reference
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Cigarette smoking among adults--United States, 2006. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2007;56:1157-1161.[Abstract] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17989644 [Full Text] http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5644a2.htm

1
Reference
Mokdad A, Marks J, Stroup D, et al. Actual causes of death in the United States, 2000. JAMA. 2004;291:1238-1245. [Abstract] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15010446

5
Reference
Doll R, Peto R, Boreham J, et al. Mortality in relation to smoking: 50 years' observations on male British doctors. BMJ. 2004;328:1519.[Abstract] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15213107 [Full Text] http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/328/7455/1519

6
Reference
Peto R, Lopez AD. The future worldwide health effects of current smoking patterns. In: Koop CE, Pearson CE, Schwarz MR, eds. Critical issues in global health. New York, NY: Jossey-Bass; 2001.

7
Reference
Messer K, Pierce J, Zhu S-H, et al. The California Tobacco Control Program's effect on adult smokers: (1) Smoking cessation. Tob Control. 2007;16:85-90.[Abstract] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17400944 [Full Text] http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/16/2/85