Sonographic diagnosis of axillary artery aneurysm presenting as painful axillary mass.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Aneurysm↗
Biomedical subjects
Bret P Nelson
Publications and source records attributed to Bret P Nelson.
Atrial fibrillation.
In 2000, some 2.3 million Americans were affected by atrial fibrillation, and that number is expected to rise as our population ages. Atrial fibrillation is both a reflection of active physiologic stressors on the body and a marker of future cardiac disease progression. The disorganized atrial activity that characterizes atrial fibrillation affects cardiac function, metabolic demand, and quality of life. However, our understanding of the etiology and treatment of this condition continues to advance with the result of recent large-scale clinical trials. Diabetes, hypertension, congestive heart failure, valvular disease, and myocardial infarction are all risk factors in the development of atrial fibrillation. And the diagnosis confers a five-fold increase in the incidence of stroke. (Patients at increased risk for stroke include those with congestive heart failure, hypertension, age greater than 75, diabetes, and previous stroke.) Anticoagulation is a critical action in most cases of atrial fibrillation, as data show a 68% relative risk reduction of stroke when patients are treated with warfarin. Prior to recent trials, achieving sinus rhythm was thought to invariably improve symptoms, cardiac function, and mortality. The adverse effects of antiarrhythmic medications are now being recognized, and treatment strategies emphasizing ventricular rate control have been recommended in recent clinical practice guidelines. This shift in thinking is influencing both outpatient and emergency department management. Controlling the ventricular rate in atrial fibrillation increases cardiac output, decreases the metabolic demand of the heart, and avoids the potentially dangerous side effects of rhythm-control drugs. Rate-control agents should be selected based on the clinical profile of individual patients. A well-chosen subset of patients may benefit from either chemical or electrical cardioversion; this appears to be a reasonably safe procedure and can be accomplished on an outpatient basis. Understanding causal etiologies, managing risk for stroke (and need for anticoagulation), addressing rate, and assessing the risks of cardioversion are key elements in a comprehensive approach to atrial fibrillation.
Anti-Arrhythmia Agents↗
Opioid analgesia and assessment of the sonographic Murphy sign.
Administration of intravenous opioid analgesia to patients with undifferentiated abdominal pain remains a controversial topic in many emergency departments. To determine whether opioid analgesia impacts assessment of the sonographic Murphy sign (SM) in evaluating acute gallbladder disease (GBD), a retrospective chart review was undertaken. The chart review encompassed 119 patients, 21% of whom, having received opioid analgesia before ultrasound, constituted the opioid group. Between the opioid and control (i.e., no opioid analgesia) groups, there were no significant differences in SM sensitivity (48.2%; CI 28.7-68.1% vs. 68.8%; CI 41.3-89%, respectively) or specificity (92.5%; CI 83.4-97.5% vs. 88.9%; CI 51.8-99.7%, respectively) for GBD. There was no association between opioid analgesia and false-positive SM (OR 0.74, CI 0.08-6.65), or false-negative SM (OR 1.42, CI 0.46-4.43). We conclude that the test characteristics of SM are unaffected by opioid analgesia.
Abdominal Pain↗
Mandated pain scales improve frequency of ED analgesic administration.
A retrospective study design was used to determine the effect of introducing a mandated verbal numeric pain scale on the incidence and timing of analgesic administration in the ED. Consecutive patients presenting with renal colic, extremity trauma, headache, ophthalmologic trauma, and soft tissue injury were included. 521 encounters were reviewed before and 479 encounters after the introduction of the pain scale. Groups were similar in baseline characteristics. Analgesic use increased from 25% to 36% (p < 0.001), and analgesics were administered more rapidly after the scale was introduced (113 minutes vs. 152 minutes, p = 0.09). Analgesic use correlated with pain severity. Patients undergoing diagnostic testing were less likely to receive analgesics, especially when presenting with a headache (p < 0.001). We conclude that use of a pain scale at triage significantly increases use of analgesia, and shortens the time till its administration. Patients undergoing diagnostic workups were less likely to receive analgesia.
Adult↗