『Core EM - Emergency Medicine Podcast』のカバーアート

Core EM - Emergency Medicine Podcast

Core EM - Emergency Medicine Podcast

著者： Core EM
無料で聴く

このコンテンツについて

 Core EM Emergency Medicine PodcastCore EM 衛生・健康的な生活 身体的病い・疾患
エピソード
  • Episode 217: Prehospital Blood Transfusion

    Episode 217: Prehospital Blood Transfusion
    2026/01/01
    We discuss the shift to prehospital blood to treat shock sooner. Hosts: Nichole Bosson, MD, MPH, FACEP Avir Mitra, MD https://media.blubrry.com/coreem/content.blubrry.com/coreem/Prehospital_Transfusion.mp3 Download Leave a Comment Tags: EMS, Prehospital Care, Trauma Show Notes Core EM Modular CME Course Maximize your commute with the new Core EM Modular CME Course, featuring the most essential content distilled from our top-rated podcast episodes. This course offers 12 audio-based modules packed with pearls! Information and link below. Course Highlights: Credit: 12.5 AMA PRA Category 1 Credits™Curriculum: Comprehensive coverage of Core Emergency Medicine, with 12 modules spanning from Critical Care to Pediatrics.Cost: Free for NYU Learners$250 for Non-NYU Learners Click Here to Register and Begin Module 1 What is prehospital blood transfusion Administration of blood products in the field prior to hospital arrival Aimed at patients in hemorrhagic shock Why this matters Traditional US prehospital resuscitation relied on crystalloid ED and trauma care now prioritize early blood Hemorrhage occurs before hospital arrival Delays to definitive hemorrhage control are common Earlier blood may improve survival Supporting rationale ATLS and trauma paradigms emphasize blood over fluid National organizations support prehospital blood when feasible EMS already manages high risk, time sensitive interventions Evidence overview Data are mixed and evolving COMBAT: no benefit PAMPer: mortality benefit RePHILL: no clear benefit Signal toward benefit when transport time exceeds ~20 minutes Urban systems still experience long delays due to traffic and geography LA County median time to in hospital transfusion ~35 minutes LA County program ~2 years of planning before launch Pilot began April 1 Partnerships: LA County Fire Compton Fire Local trauma centers San Diego Blood Bank 14 units of blood circulating in the field Blood rotated back 14 days before expiration Ultimately used at Harbor UCLA Continuous temperature and safety monitoring Indications used in LA County Focused rollout Trauma related hemorrhagic shock Postpartum hemorrhage Physiologic criteria: SBP < 70 Or HR > 110 with SBP < 90 Shock index ≥ 1.2 Witnessed traumatic cardiac arrest Products: One unit whole blood preferred Two units PRBCs if whole blood unavailable Early experience ~28 patients transfused at time of discussion Evaluating: Indications Protocol adherence Time to transfusion Early outcomes Too early for outcome conclusions California collaboration Multiple active programs: Riverside (Corona Fire) LA County Ventura County Additional programs planned: Sacramento San Bernardino Programs meet monthly as CalDROP Focus on shared learning and operational optimization Barriers and concerns Trauma surgeon concerns about blood supply Need for system wide buy in Community engagement Patients who may decline transfusion Women of childbearing age and alloimmunization risk Risk of HDFN is extremely low Clear communication with receiving hospitals is essential Future direction Rapid national expansion expected Greatest benefit likely where transport delays exist Prehospital Blood Transfusion Coalition active nationally Major unresolved issue: reimbursement Currently funded largely by fire departments Sustainability depends on policy and payment reform Take-Home Points Hemorrhagic shock is best treated with blood, not crystalloid Prehospital transfusion may benefit patients with prolonged transport times Implementation requires strong partnerships with blood banks and trauma centers Early data are promising, but patient selection remains critical National collaboration is key to sustainability and future growth Read More
    続きを読む 一部表示
    1分未満
  • Episode 216: BRUE (Brief Resolved Unexplained Event)

    Episode 216: BRUE (Brief Resolved Unexplained Event)
    2025/12/01
    We review BRUEs (Brief Resolved Unexplained Events). Hosts: Ellen Duncan, MD, PhD Noumi Chowdhury, MD https://media.blubrry.com/coreem/content.blubrry.com/coreem/BRUE.mp3 Download Leave a Comment Tags: Pediatrics Show Notes What is a BRUE? BRUE stands for Brief Resolved Unexplained Event.It typically affects infants <1 year of age and is characterized by a sudden, brief, and now resolved episode of one or more of the following: Cyanosis or pallor Irregular, absent, or decreased breathing Marked change in tone (hypertonia or hypotonia) Altered level of responsiveness Crucial Caveat: BRUE is a diagnosis of exclusion. If the history and physical exam reveal a specific cause (e.g., reflux, seizure, infection), it is not a BRUE. Risk Stratification: Low Risk vs. High Risk Risk stratification is the most important step in management. While only 6-15% of cases meet strict “Low Risk” criteria, identifying these patients allows us to avoid unnecessary invasive testing. Low Risk Criteria To be considered Low Risk, the infant must meet ALL of the following: Age: > 60 days old Gestational Age: GA > 32 weeks (and Post-Conceptional Age > 45 weeks) Frequency: This is the first episode Duration: Lasted < 1 minute Intervention: No CPR performed by a trained professional Clinical Picture: Reassuring history and physical exam Management for Low Risk: Generally do not require extensive testing or admission. Prioritize safety education/anticipatory guidance. Ensure strict return precautions and close outpatient follow-up (within 24 hours). High Risk Criteria Any infant not meeting the low-risk criteria is automatically High Risk. Additional red flags include: Suspicion of child abuse History of toxin exposure Family history of sudden cardiac death Abnormal physical exam findings (trauma, neuro deficits) Management for High Risk: Requires a more thorough evaluation. Often requires hospital admission. Note: Serious underlying conditions are identified in approx. 4% of high-risk infants. Differential Diagnosis: “THE MISFITS” Mnemonic T – Trauma (Accidental or Non-accidental/Abuse) H – Heart (Congenital heart disease, dysrhythmias) E – Endocrine M – Metabolic (Inborn errors of metabolism) I – Infection (Sepsis, meningitis, pertussis, RSV) S – Seizures F – Formula (Reflux, allergy, aspiration) I – Intestinal Catastrophes (Volvulus, intussusception) T – Toxins (Medications, home exposures) S – Sepsis (Systemic infection) Workup & Diagnostics Step 1: Stabilization ABCs (Airway, Breathing, Circulation) Point-of-care Glucose Cardiorespiratory monitoring Step 2: Diagnostic Testing (For High Risk/Symptomatic Patients) Labs: VBG, CBC, Electrolytes. Imaging: CXR: Evaluate for infection and cardiothymic silhouette. EKG: Evaluate for QT prolongation or dysrhythmias. Neuro: Consider Head CT/MRI and EEG if there are concerns for trauma or seizures. Clinical Pearl: Only ~6% of diagnostic tests contribute meaningfully to the diagnosis. Be judicious—avoid “shotgunning” tests in low-risk patients. Prognosis & Outcomes Recurrence: Approximately 10% (lower than historical ALTE rates of 10-25%). Mortality: < 1%. Nearly always linked to an identifiable cause (abuse, metabolic disorder, severe infection). BRUE vs. SIDS: These are not the same. BRUE: Peaks < 2 months; occurs mostly during the day. SIDS: Peaks 2–4 months; occurs mostly midnight to 6:00 AM. Take-Home Points Diagnosis of Exclusion: You cannot call it a BRUE until you have ruled out obvious causes via history and physical. Strict Criteria: Stick strictly to the Low Risk criteria guidelines. If they miss even one (e.g., age < 60 days), they are High Risk. Education: For low-risk families, the most valuable intervention is reassurance, education, and arranging close follow-up. Systematic Approach: For high-risk infants, use a structured approach (like THE MISFITS) to ensure you don’t miss rare but reversible causes. Read More
    続きを読む 一部表示
    1分未満
  • Episode 215: Marburg Virus and Global EM

    Episode 215: Marburg Virus and Global EM
    2025/11/01

    Lessons from Rwanda’s Marburg Virus Outbreak and Building Resilient Systems in Global EM.

    Hosts:
    Tsion Firew, MD
    Brian Gilberti, MD

    https://media.blubrry.com/coreem/content.blubrry.com/coreem/Marburg_Virus.mp3 Download Leave a Comment Tags: Global Health, Infectious Diseases Show Notes Context and the Rwanda Marburg Experience
    • The Threat: Marburg Virus Disease is from the same family as Ebola and has historically had a reported fatality rate as high as 90%.
    • The Outbreak (Sept. 2024): Rwanda declared an MVD outbreak. The initial cases involved a miner, his pregnant wife (who fell ill and died after having a baby), and the baby (who also died).
    • Healthcare Worker Impact: The wife was treated at an epicenter hospital. Eight HCWs were exposed to a nurse who was coding in the ICU; all eight developed symptoms, tested positive within a week, and four of them died.
    • The Turning Point: The outbreak happened in city referral hospitals where advanced medical interventions (dialysis, mechanical ventilation) were available.
      • Rapid Therapeutics Access: Within 10 days of identifying Marburg, novel therapies (experimental drugs and monoclonal antibodies) and an experimental vaccine were made available through diplomacy with the US government/CDC and agencies like WHO, Africa CDC, CEPI and more.
    • The Outcome: This coordinated effort—combini...
    続きを読む 一部表示
    1分未満
まだレビューはありません