Eran Leshem MD, Michael Rahkovich MD, Anna Mazo MD, Mahmoud Suleiman MD, Miri Blich MD, Avishag Laish-Farkash MD, Yuval Konstantino MD, Rami Fogelman MD, Boris Strasberg MD, Michael Geist MD, Israel Chetboun MD, Moshe Swissa MD, Michael Ilan MD, Aharon Glick MD, Yoav Michowitz MD, Raphael Rosso MD, Michael Glikson MD and Bernard Belhassen MD
Background: Limited information exists about detailed clinical characteristics and management of the small subset of Brugada syndrome (BrS) patients who had an arrhythmic event (AE).
Objectives: To conduct the first nationwide survey focused on BrS patients with documented AE.
Methods: Israeli electrophysiology units participated if they had treated BrS patients who had cardiac arrest (CA) (lethal/aborted; group 1) or experienced appropriate therapy for tachyarrhythmias after prophylactic implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) implantation (group 2).
Results: The cohort comprised 31 patients: 25 in group 1, 6 in group 2. Group 1: 96% male, mean CA age 38 years (range 13–84). Nine patients (36%) presented with arrhythmic storm and three had a lethal outcome; 17 (68%) had spontaneous type 1 Brugada electrocardiography (ECG). An electrophysiology study (EPS) was performed on 11 patients with inducible ventricular fibrillation (VF) in 10, which was prevented by quinidine in 9/10 patients. During follow-up (143 ± 119 months) eight patients experienced appropriate shocks, none while on quinidine. Group 2: all male, age 30–53 years; 4/6 patients had familial history of sudden death age < 50 years. Five patients had spontaneous type 1 Brugada ECG and four were asymptomatic at ICD implantation. EPS was performed in four patients with inducible VF in three. During long-term follow-up, five patients received ≥ 1 appropriate shocks, one had ATP for sustained VT (none taking quinidine). No AE recurred in patients subsequently treated with quinidine.
Conclusions: CA from BrS is apparently a rare occurrence on a national scale and no AE occurred in any patient treated with quinidine.
Mansour Khoury MD, Sigalit Caspi RN, Ruth Stalnikowics MD, Elad Peless RN, Ela Raiizman RN MA and Shaden Salameh MD MHA
Background: Acute musculoskeletal pain is one of the most commonly reported symptoms among patients visiting the emergency department (ED). Treatment with over-the-counter pain medications, given by nurses, results in improved pain management and reduces the waiting time to drug administration without significant side effects. Opioid analgesics are extensively used for acute pain in the ED. Compared to morphine, oxycodone has a much more specific pharmacological activity, higher analgesic potential, and more tolerable side effects.
Objectives: To assess the degree of pain reduction using different protocols, including dypirone and oxycodone given by nurses, in treating acute musculoskeletal pain in the emergency department (primary outcome) and to evaluate the need for rescue medications (secondary outcome).
Methods: This observational prospective clinical trial compared two groups of 50 patients, each one visiting the ED due to musculoskeletal pain. One group was treated with dipyrone syrup and the other was treated with oxycodone syrup. The primary outcome was pain reduction measured by the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS). The secondary outcome was the difference in need for rescue medications.
Results: The reduction in the NRS was greater in the patients treated with oxycodone. This finding was statistically and clinically significant (P < 0.001). The need for rescue medications was also significantly reduced in this group of patients (P = 0.007).
Conclusions: This study showed that the administration of over-the-counter oxycodone syrup by nurses decreases the post-treatment pain reported by patients, reduces the need for rescue medications, and increases the satisfaction of the medical staff.
Viktoria Leikin-Zach MD, Eilon Shany MD, Maayan Yitshak-Sade PhD, Ron Eshel B Med Sc, Tali Shafat MD, Avraham Borer MD and Rimma Melamed MD
Background: Extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL) production is the most common antimicrobial resistance mechanism in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU), with colonization and blood stream infections being a major threat to this population. Since 2013, all NICU admissions at our facility were screened twice weekly for ESBL colonization.
Objectives: To determine independent risk factors for colonization of infants with ESBL-producing bacteria in the NICU.
Methods: A retrospective case study of ESBL-colonized infants vs. controls (matched by date of birth and gestational age) was conducted in the NICU of Soroka University Medical Center, Israel, between 2013 and 2014. Epidemiological, laboratory, and clinical data were extracted from medical files. Univariable and multivariable analyses were used to assess associations between ESBL colonization and possible clinical risk factors.
Results: Of 639 admissions during the study period, 87 were found to be ESBL-colonized (case infants) and were matched to 87 controls. Five case infants became infected (5.7%) with ESBL strains. Klebsiella pneumoniae was the most common isolated bacteria. The mean time from admission to colonization was 15 days. Univariable analysis showed an association of male gender and highest Apgar score at 1 and 5 minutes with ESBL colonization (P < 0.05). Multivariable analysis yielded only a possible association of higher Apgar score at 1 and 5 minutes (hazard ratio [HR] 1.515, 95% confidence interval [95%CI] 0.993-2.314; HR 1.603, 95%CI 0.958–2.682, respectively) with ESBL colonization.
Conclusions: Future studies should focus on maternal colonization and possible strategies for preventing vertical transmission of ESBL strains to high-risk neonates.