Always keep your differential broad

I had a case in our department that I won’t forget for a while, and it reminded me to keep my differential broad even if the suspected diagnosis seems blatantly obvious.

 

An early 40’s female presented to our ER about 5 days after an MVC in which she was the restrained driver, where the car rolled onto its side going about 40s-50s MPH. + LOC, + airbags. Paramedics arrived on scene after a while when she was up and walking, and she refused to be taken to the ER. Over the following 5 days, she had near constant neck pain as well as a worsening headache and worsening abdominal and “rib” pain on the lower left side.

She presented to our ER in a hallway bed, where her initial HR was in the mid 80s, but BP was 80s/40s on multiple checks. O2 sat and temperature were normal. Mental status was normal, and there were no physical signs of trauma on her body. She had tenderness to the L lower and lateral ribs, as well as LUQ/LMQ abdominal tenderness, and lower midline C-spine tenderness. I quickly had her placed in a cervical collar, and brought the ultrasound to bedside a performed a FAST, which was negative (to my surprise).

I ordered fluid boluses, trauma labs, type and crossmatch, and planned to send her for a man scan, but her kidney function showed an AKI and therefore had to wait for one fluid bolus before going to the scanner. BP slowly started to trend upwards, not reaching over mid 90s systolic before she went to the scanner. Of note, she did have a slightly elevated white count in the mid-to-upper teens.

My differential? Trauma, trauma, trauma. She has to be bleeding somewhere, she may have a fractured C-spine, intracranial injury, intraabdominal injury, likely splenic laceration. My FAST just must not have picked it up. Given the history and clinical circumstance, I don’t think I was completely wrong for not having anything else on my differential for this hypotensive patient with concerning physical exam findings 5 days out from a serious car accident.

Once her man scan was done, I looked though the scans and noticed her right kidney was heterogenous with contrast enhancement with stranding around it. No fluid in her pelvis, and the rest of the man scan was entirely negative. Radiology soon called and said she had the “worst case of pyelonephritis I think I’ve ever seen”. A urine sample was finally collected after the scan resulted, which was, no longer to my surprise, infected. Upon talking to the patient, she denied any dysuria or frequency, but said her urine was “green” this morning. She never had any suprapubic pain.

That is the story of how I admitted a patient to medicine for pyelonephritis after getting a man scan and diagnosing it on CT. I don’t think I’ll be changing the top item on my differential, but I think I will keep other causes of hypotension and shock on my differential until they are ruled out in cases of delayed trauma presentation, such as this one.

Headache in a post-neurosurgical patient

Earlier this month while moonlighting I had an approximately 40yM present for a headache (9/10 pain) for 3 days.

I know, this is an everyday occurrence.

But in his case he had a craniotomy with removal of a meningioma 1 month prior. He also noted 2 weeks of swelling on the left side of his head along the surgical scar.
ROS: denied fevers, chills, changes in vision, weakness, numbness, or tingling, etc.

PE: VSS, HEENT: Left side of head extending from his surgical scar and wrapping around to even under his L eyebrow was swollen and firm. NEURO: WNL

So, I know something isn’t right and my guess is that he either had a bleed or infection associated with his surgery. I order a CT head. For his headache I give him a migraine cocktail (IVF, compazine, and benadryl, minus the toradol).

img_1534

img_1535

After I see the CT images, I rush to check on the patient as the CT obviously shows quite a bit of midline shift and the patient states his headache is drastically improved (2/10 down from 9/10). Apparently migraine cocktails work on all causes of headache.

I consulted Neurosurgery who promptly admitted the patient to the ICU with plans to go to the OR. Approximately 45 minutes later, after the NES nurse practioner has seen the patient and he is getting packed up to go to the ICU, the radiologist calls to notify me of the CT findings.

This is a reminder to ALWAYS look at CT images yourself, especially if you’re expecting a life threatening finding.

Head injury patients with delayed presentation to ED

Another pearl from EM Lit of Note. Bottom line: Retro review of CT head obtained for trauma divided into <24 hours and >24 hours time of presentation. The delayed presenters had a HIGHER percentage of positive CT and had a similar amount of patients requiring NES intervention.

We discussed this the other day. First Care obtained a head CT on a patient several days after a minor head injury. We presumed it was not indicated. Then I read this paper.

Unfortunately I cannot find in the paper a description of time to presentation. It is grouped into less than 24 hours and greater than. I wonder if the likelihood of positive CT scan decreases as time from injury to presentation increases.

In any event, this poses difficult questions. Should we obtain more CTs on the delayed presenters? They are as likely to have positive findings. In addition, the NICE guideline is 70% sensitive, versus its comforting 98% in the less than 24 hour group.

Would be a good article to discuss for journal club. Would love to see some comments.

Interesting Ultrasound

A late 20s F G4P3003 at approximately 6 weeks gestation by LMP presents with a chief complaint of vaginal bleeding. A few hours PTA, patient states she felt a “gush of blood” with some mild abdominal cramping. VSS. On exam, noted to have a moderate amount of vaginal bleeding per the os. On our bedside ultrasound we note what appears to be a viable IUP with cardiac activity.  However, the uterus appears septate, with half containing the IUP and the other half more hyperechoic/solid in nature. We were concerned for a possible subchorionic hemorrhage and consulted OB/GYN. Our bedside US image is below:

BS US

OB came down with their Cadillac ultrasound and confirmed our findings.  For comparison, here is their much clearer image:

OB US

For this patient, with this large of a subchorionic bleed, the likelihood of her carrying this pregnancy to term was low. They planned to have her follow up in clinic for a repeat ultrasound in 2 weeks to reassess viability. Per our OB colleagues, other things on the differential included a fibroid. However, as this patient had 3 very healthy and rambunctious boys at the bedside with her, OB commented that a fibroid that large would likely have resulted in infertility.

And from UptoDate:

“A subchorionic hemorrhage or hematoma is a risk factor for spontaneous abortion, particularly when it amounts to 25 percent or more of the volume of the gestational sac. A meta-analysis of seven comparative studies found that women having a subchorionic hematoma had a significantly increased risk of spontaneous abortion, compared to women without such findings (18 versus 9 percent; OR 2.18, 95% CI 1.29–3.68). The findings also are associated with an increased risk of placental abruption (4 versus 1 percent; OR 5.71, 95% CI 3.91–8.33) and preterm premature rupture of membranes (4 versus 2 percent; OR 1.64, 95% CI 1.22–2.21). The increased risks of preterm labor and stillbirth appeared to be dependent upon the presence of vaginal bleeding.

Pregnancy outcome associated with subchorionic hematoma also relates to location, with worse outcomes observed for retroplacental hematomas, compared to marginal hematomas. The location, rather than the size, of a subchorionic hematoma may be the most important predictor of pregnancy outcome. Evidence relating to the size of the hematoma and the risk of adverse outcomes is inconclusive.

The only management option for subchorionic hematoma is expectant. There is insufficient evidence regarding whether bed rest decreases the risk of pregnancy loss when a subchorionic hematoma is present. Some clinicians repeat an ultrasound in one to two weeks to confirm fetal viability and assess any change in size of the hematoma, primarily to provide reassurance to the patient. A subchorionic hematoma is not an indication to conduct a diagnostic evaluation for an acquired or inherited thrombophilia.”

Finally

I am quite excited about this study but sad I was not the one to publish it. Out of South Florida, a study of 72 patients who received a NONCONTRAST CT Abdomen for various locations of abdominal pain.

Excluded were: trauma, pregnant, surgery in past 30 days, pain more than 3 days, MD discretion (thought usually to be suspicion for vascular emergency), unable to be reached for 7 day follow up, would not consent, unstable, suspected renal stone (as this is already the standard of care), known cancer, BMI < 18. Sounds like a lot of exclusions but this pared the population down to the general population of patients in whom I would consider the noncontrast CT abd for nonspecific abdominal pain. Notice suspicion for appendicitis was not an exclusion, many studies have shown minimal benefit to oral contrast in appendicitis. They also did not exclude very acute abdominal pain (ie using a minimum number of hours of pain).

The results: 0/72 patients had a missed diagnosis on the initial noncontrast CT. 3/72 had repeat contrasted studies which added little. Of the 31 patients discharged, no one had surgery, death, or repeat CTs done.

This is obviously a small sample at one hospital. Selection bias can be a factor, as MD discretion was an exclusion. I would love to see more studies like this, possibly RCTs. As more and more centers get the higher resolution CTs, we should see less and less contrast given for CT of the abdomen and pelvis.

RLQ pain and N/V

15 yr male with hx of hemophilia presenting with 1 day hx of progressively worsening RLQ pain, decreased PO, nausea, and vomiting. Described RLQ as a “small swelling’ that continued to span across the R abdomen as the day progressed. Denies dysuria, hematuria, hematemesis, hematochezia, constipation, diarrhea, abd trauma, or testicular pain. No previous abdominal surgeries. Physical exam is significant for RUQ and RLQ tenderness, no obvious swelling, no ecchymosis seen. He definitely appeared ill and uncomfortable. A&Ox4.

So already…what are we considering?  Appendicitis …. Peritoneal bleed … bowel obstruction …maybe a few others (UTI, Kidney Stones, STI).

While waiting on CT Abd/Pelvis imaging to be completed, patient is found to be anemic with a Hgb of 8. Normal WBCs. Platelets: 300. Elevated PTT: 83. Normal PT/INR. Urinalysis…. negative. IV Fluids have already been started. Zofran for his continued nausea.

Here’s a significant snapshot of the CT

Abdomen

———————

It spanned from the R kidney down to the bladder. Actively extravasating. Hydronephrosis due to the hematoma compressing the R ureter. It compressed the R renal vasculature as well, and anteriorly displaced the R kidney.

Contacted Hematology, where we decided to administer FEIBA. (He usually takes Alphanate MWF, but had not taken any medicine on day of presentation. Plus, the hospital did not have his particular medication, so we needed to find an alternative.) He was admitted to the Hematology service. They have plans of contacting Surgery for any possible interventions once his Hgb stabilized.

Repeat CBC (after patient had been admitted) showed that the Hgb had fallen to 6.0.

Diagnosis: 15 year old male with non-traumatic R retro peritoneal hematoma. Source currently unknown.

Pacemaker identification from CXR

This is a neat party trick I picked up on CCU.  Now when a patient comes in with  pacemaker malfunction/chest pain/syncope and needs a Cardiology workup and admission, but hasn’t been able to locate their pacemaker card since the mid 90’s, you can look like a pro and know the device manufacturer from CXR alone (which is something we get anyway on anyone who remotely looks like they might need Cardiology).

Paper and algorithm can be found here:

http://www.ianchristoph.com/physician-resources-2/device_id.pd

Positioning is Everything

When using a chest x-ray to look for a pneumothorax, positioning of the patient is everything.  The first chest x-ray below is an upright chest x-ray from an OSH of a patient that fell 30 feet from deer stand and was found to have a right pneumothorax.  The OSH didn’t do any other imaging and didn’t even send the patient with a c-collar.

When the patient arrived we laid him down and placed a c-collar and assumed that his spines weren’t cleared yet.  When we shot the portable, supine chest x-ray in our ED we couldn’t see a pneumothorax and our radiologist actually read it as no pneumothorax.

Using the US, an EFAST was performed and showed a pneumothorax and the subsequent Chest CT verified it.  Therefore the next time you get an ED, supine chest xray on someone, remember that just because you don’t see a pneumothorax on a supine CXR, doesn’t mean they don’t have one.  The optimal xray is an upright chest xray (expiratory if possible)!

Upright OSH xrayUpright Chest x-ray from OSH

Supine UofL portable Xray

Portable, supine Chest X-ray in our ED

CT scan

CT showing the Right Pneumothorax