Boxer's Fracture- Back to basics

A review of a bread & butter presentation based on a young man I saw last week who was vague about how his injury occured.

Boxers 1.jpg

Boxer's fractures are fractures of the 5th metacarpal neck, and typically occur from hitting something with a clenched fist.

normal.jpg

Along with the usual neurovascular exam, check for rotational deformity.

Fingers are normally parallel went hand closed

 VS,

rotational deformity.jpg

Small finger rotated or overlapping ring finger. Compare to other hand if needed.

No rotational deformity is acceptable

Reduce the fracture if there is a lot of angulation- numbers vary but generally > 40% = reduction. Function will be likely OK with more angulation but will have odd looking knuckles and a lump in palm.

boxers 2.jpg

    About 45 degrees

Reduction- pain control with hematoma or ulnar block, or procedural sedation.

For successful reduction, flex the MCP to 90. Then push on the bent finger to reduce the metacarpal head while keeping pressure on the metacarpal shaft.

boxers reduction.jpg

Apply an ulnar gutter splint with 4th and 5th fingers bent to 70-90 degrees. Buddy taping the 4th and 5th fingers together provides rotational stabilization.

Weekly Wellness 12-3-2014

NUTRITIONAL BYTES

Article: How to Really Eat Like a Hunter-Gatherer: Why the Paleo Diet is Half Baked

Recipe: Braise You Way Through the Winter

 

WORKOUT OF THE WEEK

Article: Run to Stay Young

Workout: Go for a run! Even if it's just around the block! Even if you can only jog at a slow pace!

For a HIIT run, alternate easy jogging with full on sprinting for 30 seconds intervals. 4-6 minutes ought to do it!

If you are  more the trail-running type, take 95th street West as far as you can until you end up in the Palos system of Cook County's Forest Preserve. There is a great 3 mile Loop they recently marked off starting from the parking area at Wolf Road Woods (see MAP). It's really nice out there, you feel like you got far away from the city, and it's only 9 miles from the hospital! Great for mountain biking, birdwatching, dogwalking, picnicking, and hiking too! Here are directions to the Wolf Road Woods parking area. Just don't eat any Amanita mushrooms while you're out there. 

82 y/o woman with hypoxia

HPI

An 82 y/o woman with multiple sclerosis, history of DVT on Coumadin and chronic indwelling Foley is sent from nursing home for hypoxia. Patient is not on oxygen at nursing home. Her pulse Ox was low (83) at the nursing home, so they sent her away to Christ hospital. EMS said they put her on 15L oxygen on non-rebreather on the transfer.

Code 44 was called by nurse. On arrival, patient said she was sleeping. She has no clue why she is sent over to the hospital. She denies chest pain or shortness of breath or any symptoms. She has not been sick. 

Physical Exam 

Vitals: SpO2-92 on 15L oxygen via non-rebreather. RR: 18, BP 146/62, P 77.

 

Exam:

Gen: NAD. Very comfortable. Bluish skin

CVS: RRR

Pulm: CTAB

Abd: Non-tender, soft. Foley present. Orange urine in Foley bag.

Neuro: Patient can shrug shoulders but strength 1/5. Sensation diminished below shoulders (all are baseline)

 

Intervention 

*Patient has hypoxia on SpO2 but she looks very good. Something does not fit quite right. ABG with panel was ordered on top of Code 44 labs.

EKG: normal rate, normal sinus rhythm, no ischemia

CXR: normal without consolidation 

ABG: pH 7.44, pCO2 44, pO2 461,  HCO3 28, O2 sat 98, Carbonmonoxide 3.1, O2 content arterial 10 (Low), OxyHemoglobin 80.8, Methemoglobin 14.9 % (normal <1.2%)

Labs: normal BMP, normal CBC, and therapeutic INR: 2.3. Troponin: <0.02, BNP 30 

 

Patient has methemoglobinemia. Everything now fits: the low pulse Ox, maybe questionable bluish skin and patient’s lack of symptoms.

What’s the culprit? We tried to remember the meds that can induce methemoglobinemia from board exams. Nitrous or Sulfa containing meds!

Well, let’s ask our pharmacist to look at her meds list. Luckily, our patient was a healthy MS patient. Besides warfarin and Baclofen, she was given 1 other medication by nursing home. Phenazopyridine (pyridium)!

Phenazopyridine (pyridium)

Phenazopyridine is a urinary tract analgesic and available over the counter. It is supposed to be used for 3 days in an acute treatment for patients with dysuria. This poor old lady was moved to nursing home 3 months ago. NH put her on a Foley since she has urinary incontinence due to MS, and when she complained of Foley irritating her urethra, they put her on Pyridium for 3 months.

Treatment: We started pushing IV methylene blue 1mg/kg and within minutes, her pulse Ox improved to 98 on room air.

Patient update: Daughters came to thank the ER doctor months later. They moved their mom to a different nursing home. She is doing well. 

Methemoglobinemia (UpToDate)

Diagnosis: Methemoglobin level on ABG, normally methemoglobin levels <1%

Pathophys: Ferrous (Fe 2+) in heme group of hemoglobin is oxidized to the ferric state (Fe 3+). This converts hemoglobin into methemoglobin, which CAN’T bind oxygen. In addition, oxygen affinity of any remaining ferrous hemes is increased, shifting the oxygen dissociation curve to the left, so oxygen can’t be delivered to tissues. => The patient has greater functional anemia.

Acquired Causes: oxidizing agents (medications): nitrites, nitroglycerin, nitroprusside, Bactrim, benzocaine, inhaled nitric oxide, aniline and its derivatives etc. Dapsone and topical anesthetics appear to be most common precipitating agents.  

Congenital Cause: Congenital methemoglobinemia is characterized by diminished enzymatic reduction of methemoglobin back to functional hemoglobin. Affected patients appear cyanotic but are generally asymptomatic.

There is a family that lived in the hills of Kentucky known as “Blue Fugates.” They have a congenital deficiency in the enzyme causing them to have methemoglobinemia. It is autosomal recessive but this family intermarries, so viola..

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/blue-skinned-people-kentucky-reveal-todays-genetic-lesson/story?id=15759819#.T5sgQnr-mVo

Treatment:

-Asymptomatic: discontinue the offending agent

- Symptomatic or methemoglobin level>20%:  IV methylene blue 1-2 mg/kg can be given over 5 minutes. Response is rapid. A second dose may be repeated in one hour but retreatment is often not necessary. 

-Blood transfusion or exchange transfusion may be helpful in people who are in shock. Hyperbaric oxygen has been used with anecdotal success in severe cases.

Although ascorbic acid is an answer on board questions, it is a less effective treatment than methylene blue.

Symptoms:

  1. Methemoglobin>15%: cyanosis, asymptomatic
  2. >30%, fatigue, headache, dizziness, tachycardia, weakness
  3. >55%: dyspnea, bradycardia, seizures, coma
  4. >70%: death

 

What about pyridium?

- Pyridium has been reported sparingly in medical literature as a cause of methemoglobinemia, either as an acute overdose or in patients with prolonged therapeutic use.

Take Home Points:

- Methemoglobinemia on board questions: pulse Ox 87 no matter how much oxygen is given. Blood itself is chocolate-colored. Get ABG with panel.

- It is often drug induced. Topical anesthetic (patients coming from GI procedure) or TMP-SMX are common meds.

- Treatment: IV methylene blue 1-2mg/kg x 1

 

Weekly Wellness

Happy Thanksgiving! Here's to wishing everyone a safe, happy, and healthy time with loved ones.

 

NUTRITIONAL BYTES

Articles: A wolf can eat up to 30 lbs in one sitting. That doesn't mean you should

             Michael Pollan's 7 Rules for Eating 

Recipes: A smorgasboard of vegetarian Thanksgiving recipes.

 

WORKOUT OF THE WEEK

Articles: The Scientific 7-Minute Workout

             The Advanced 7-Minute Workout

Workout: NYTimes has a new app that you can use from your computer, tablet or phone. Very user friendly. There are 2 workouts thus far, with the first being less intense than the second. The second workout also requires two dumbbells. The app provides complete instructions and times you. A great way to get your heart rate up (even higher!) after a shift, in the call room during trauma or ortho rotations, or while you're traveling. If the moves are too easy or difficult, modify. For example, in the first workout, instead of doing regular air squats, you could jump squats for added intensity. Find the exercises that are right for you!

 

Wednesday Wellness 11-5-2014

NUTRIONAL BYTES

Article: Healthy facts about acorn squash

Recipe: Wild-rice stuffed acorn squash

 

WORKOUT OF THE WEEK

4 rounds of (total time is only 6 minutes!):

Box jumps x's 30 sec (I throw a yoga mat on my coffee table for this one since I don't have a box)

Divebomber pushups x's 30 sec (demonstrated here by Dr. Joe Masler)

Star Jumps x's 30 sec (land on the balls of your feet, not your heels)

 

Articles: Best exercises for healthy bones

             Plyometrics: The best combo of cardio and strength training?

 

Evaluation of the C-spine in Trauma

Journal Club Synopsis-Evaluation of the Cervical Spine in Trauma-September 2014


Many thanks to Trushar and Rupal Naik for hosting, and to Adam, Stephen, Theresa, Natalie K, John P and John M for their insightful analyses.


We see a lot of patients with neck pain after MVCs.  Many can be safely cleared clinically using NEXUS or the Canadian C-spine decision instruments.  When imaging is performed, it’s usually CT rather than Xrays.  We’ve all seen trauma patients hang out for hours/days in c-collars after CT, awaiting either re-assessment when alert, or an MRI.  C-collars cause complications, and this can be a resource utilization challenge.  So, the question on the table...is CT enough?


1. Resnick S, et al:  Clinical Relevance of Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Cervical Spine Clearance A Prospective Study. JAMA Surg 2014; doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2014.867 Published online July 30, 2014.

Just saying, this is the best trial of the three.  It’s a prospective observational study from USC/LAC of 830 awake/alert adults after blunt trauma who had midline tenderness and/or focal neuro deficits (so can’t be cleared with NEXUS) and a negative C-spine CT.  Kenji Inaba of EM:RAP fame is second author.  Primary outcome was clinically significant C-spine (CS) injuries, defined as requiring surgery or a halo.  Overall, 164 (20%) CS injuries were diagnosed, and 23 (3%) were clinically significant.  All clinically significant CS injuries were detected by CT.  CT missed 9% of injuries, i.e., 15 of 681 patients (2.2%) had normal CT but new finding on MRI.  However, none of these injuries required surgery, halo, or change in management based on MRI.  For detecting any CS injury, CT sensitivity was 91% and specificity was 100%.  For clinically significant CS injury, CT sensitivity and specificity were both 100%.  Patients with distracting injuries were excluded.

Limitations:
  MRIs were ordered at discretion of attending surgeon or neurosurgeon.  Follow-up was only until day of discharge.  They used advanced 64-slice CT scanners.  Of the 15 patients with normal CT/abnormal MRI, only 6 had neurologic symptoms, and these were all sensory deficits.  Clinically significant injury  in patients with motor deficits were all identified on CT, leading authors to state that MRI “may be indicated” in patients with motor deficit and normal CT scan.


2. Russin JJ, et. al.: Computed tomography for clearance of cervical spine injury in the unevaluable patient. World Neurosurg. 2013;80(3-4):405-413.  

Ok, what about the “unevaluable” blunt trauma patient, defined as GCS < 15, distracting injuries, and/or altered/intoxicated?  This is a higher risk population for cervical spine injury, and there’s a lot of low quality literature out there about this group of patients, with conflicting recommendations.  This was an analysis of 13 articles including patients with negative C-spine CT who also underwent MRI, however only 9 studies included patient management data.  In these 9 studies, 115 of 855 patients with abnormal MRI + negative C-spine CT had change in management.  Three of 855 (0.35%) patients required surgical stabilization (NNT=285), and 57/855 (7%) received “extended time in C-collar.”  

Limitations:  Why were patients chosen to receive an MRI...who knows?  All three of the patients requiring surgical stabilization were from 2 studies by the same author....hmmm.   What’s the meaning/significance of “extended time in C-collar?”  “Missed injuries” had variable treatment depending on the study. Several studies used older generation CT scanners, several were retrospective. There was limited followup/clinical information available for many of these studies. This is a descriptive review, and does not include the statistical methodology of a meta-analysis.  It’s also always imperative to remember the garbage in/garbage out philosophy...if the included studies
(even in a meta-analysis) are of poor quality, then conclusions are dubious. Authors conclude that
CT alone is inadequate in this patient population.  The room was not impressed.

 

3. Panczykowski DM, et. al.: Comparative effectiveness of using computed tomography alone to exclude cervical spine injuries in obtunded or intubated patients: meta-analysis of 14,327 patients with blunt trauma. J Neurosurg. 2011;115(3):541-549.  

Another attempt to look at the literature on the “unevaluable patient”, this time specifically blunt trauma patients who were obtunded or intubated.  This was a meta-analysis of 17 cohort trials with 14,000+ patients, 12,700+ with negative CT.  Compared to MRI, CT missed 7 unstable injuries (0.05%).  One patient received a halo, 3 received surgical stabilization, 3 were treated with collars (NNT=3000), sensitivity/specificity of CT both >99.9% (95% CI 0.99-1.00).  Much better methodology than Russin, and included only studies with modern CT slice thickness and those reporting patient outcomes.  

Limitations:  Included 10 retrospective trials, and missing significant amount of descriptive demographic data.  There were a variety of reasons listed for ordering MRI, and 1,573 patients didn’t receive MRI.

 

Final thoughts...in the room, no love for Flex/Ex films.  Reasonable agreement based on discussion, JC articles and background articles that even after negative CT, MRI is important in patients with motor symptoms, and should be considered in the elderly, especially as advancing age is associated with cervical spondylosis.  Other high risk groups include patients with rheumatoid arthritis/ankylosing spondylitis, as these arthritides predispose to cervical spine fracture, and also to ligamentous injury such as atlantoaxial instability. Mechanism and degree of point tenderness will always play a role in imaging decisions.  Evidence for the management of the “unevaluable patient” is still inconclusive, although the third article (Panczykowski) is reassuring.

MIC KEY

M-O-U-S-E? No.

 

The minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) is the lowest concentration of an antimicrobial that will inhibit growth of a certain microbe.  In the United States, the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) provides standardization of MIC determinations and publish guidelines regularly (the European organization is EUCAST).  Each antimicrobial listed in a culture report will be assigned one of three breakpoints determined by CLSI: “susceptible,” “intermediate,” or “resistant.” 

Many factors, including laboratory and clinical information, determine the interpretation of reported MIC breakpoints.  The term “breakpoint” can be thought of three different, yet interrelated, ways. A microbiologic breakpoint is determined by a multitude of in vitro tests evaluating the physical interaction of the drug with the microbe.  A clinical breakpoint factors in whether there is a good chance of infection resolution, mainly based off of clinical studies.  Similar to a clinical breakpoint, pharmacokinetic/pharmcodynamic breakpoints factor for such things as location of infection and ability to obtain proper drug levels in that area of the body.

Let us use the drug daptomycin for a VRE pneumonia as an example.  The drug may have excellent bacteriocidal activity against the specific cultured organism in vitro, but when factoring in clinical and PK/PD data, we know lung surfactant inactivates daptomycin.  We would not be able to successfully treat the infection with this antimicrobial agent.  The MIC report might state “susceptible” in vitro, but clinically it may as well be regarded as resistant. 

Sooo…can’t I just pick the drug with the lowest number next to it that says “susceptible?”

Apples and oranges, my friend.  It is not useful to compare the MIC concentration value of one drug to another.  The MIC expressed in “mg/L” is unique to each drug based off of PK/PD data done with fancy modeling and simulations.  The determination of what concentrations to use when setting up dilutions to test MICs incorporate things like protein binding, tissue distribution, and even the type of bug that was cultured.  Let’s look at an example:

Source: Urine

E. coli >100,000/mL

Status: Final

Results:

Ampicillin

>/= 16

Resistant

Cefazolin

4

Susceptible

Ciprofloxacin

</= 0.5

Susceptible

Gentamicin

</= 2

Susceptible

Nitrofurantoin

</= 32

Susceptible

Piperacillin/Tazobactam

</= 8

Susceptible

 

Just strictly looking at numbers, it appears ciprofloxacin would be better than the rest since its MIC is </= 0.5 mg/L.  Nitrofurantoin, even though the report says susceptible, has a larger MIC concentration of </= 32 mg/L.  Both would eradicate this microbe with similar efficacy.  Cefazolin has a value of 4 mg/L.  Notice that it does not have the “</=” designation.  This means the MIC for cefazolin is right at the breakpoint of susceptible and intermediate – an MIC of 8 mg/L may read as intermediate.  The number would still be less than 32 such as for nitrofurantoin but would possibly have less chance of clearing the infection.  Also note that resistance is reported for an MIC of 16 for ampicillin.  Even though it is less than 32, the likelihood of ampicillin clearing the infection would be low.

The key to correctly interpreting this data is to also incorporate antimicrobial stewardship.  If this is an otherwise healthy young female with an uncomplicated cystitis, nitrofurantoin should be the drug of choice.  Although other antibiotics are listed as “susceptible,” it’s like using a shotgun when a Nerf gun would do the job.  Nitrofurantoin is only used for this indication and should be considered first.  Ciprofloxacin would cure the infection and isn’t wrong to use in this situation, but we should preserve our use of it for silly things like anthrax and pseudomonas.

 

Bottom Line:

  • Interpreting culture results appropriately requires an appreciation for the microbe species and location of infection
  • Comparing MIC concentrations between different drugs is like comparing apples and oranges
  • Utilizing an antibiotic with the “</=” designation may be your best bet
  • Exercise antimicrobial stewardship and choose the lowest-spectrum antimicrobial that will get the job done
  • Consult your friendly pharmacist for assistance

 

Wednesday Wellness

NUTRITIONAL BYTES

 

WORKOUT OF THE WEEK


Article: What is HIIT?

Wednesday Wellness

NUTRIONAL BYTES

WORKOUT OF THE WEEK

  • 6 minute workout...fast forward to ~3:50 to go straight to the workout part...the beginning is him talking about fitness (interesting to hear his philosophy if you have the time).

 

Article: What's your fitness age?

Wednesday Wellness

NUTRITIONAL BYTES

WORKOUT OF THE WEEK  (WOW)

  • Remember, you can adjust the workup by playing with the number of sets and/or reps, as well as different variations of the exercises, to best suit your needs and goals. Only you truly know what your body is capable of, and everyone has different fitness goals. Find something that's right for you.
  • Warm Up: 0.5-1.0 mile walk/jog/run, then,

  • Extra challenge: See how fast you can do a complete run through this circuit.

 

Wed Wellness

Hello Advocate Christ Residents & Attendings,
     As part of our burgeoning new Wellness program, I will be sending out an email every Wednesday. The purpose of the email will be to share health-related information in the form of links to thought-provoking and motivational articles, videos, recipes, etc. Our jobs are incredibly demanding and stressful, and I strongly believe that a healthy diet coupled with regular, strenuous exertion is key to keeping us in optimum shape for being the best doctors/humans we can be.
     I want to make clear from the get-go that I do not subscribe to or advocate any one-type of dietary discipline (such as vegetarianism, veganism, paleolithic diet, Atkins nutrition approach, fruitarianism, etc). Rather, I believe that most nutrition models have something interesting and useful to offer us, and as such will send out information about a wide variety of nutritional approaches. Hopefully you will find something that resonates with you, and you can incorporate some of what you learn into your life. 
     I will also include a Workout of the Week (WOW) in each email. It doesn't matter what you eat if you are a couch potato! My goal is to provide a challenging workout that can be completed at home in less than 20 minutes without any fitness equipment. Feel free to reduce or increased number of repetitions or sets as needed to help this workout fit your needs and abilities. I will include links to show brief demonstration of exercises in case you do not know how to do them. 
     Finally, please feel free to email with any ideas you may have on wellness related information that you think should be shared! I would love to learn about new diets, recipes, exercises, or anything else pertaining to wellness. And if there is someone you would like to be included in this list, send me their email address and I will include it. Conversely, if there is anyone who does NOT wish to be on the list, let me know and I'll take you off so that you can slowly balloon to Advocate Christ Emergency Department Standard Patient Size in peace. 
     

NUTRITIONAL BYTES OF THE WEEK

WORKOUT OF THE WEEK (WOW)

  • 3 Sets of:
    • "Sprint there, jog back": 25 yds, 3 repetitions
    • Dips: 15 repetitions
    • Burpees: 15 repetitions
    • Pushups: 15 repetitions (increased intensity: decline-ups)
"If we could give every individual the right amount of nourishment and exercise, not too little and not too much, we would have found the safest way to health."
                                                          ---Hippocrates

Patil-Syracuse Mask For Fiberoptic Intubation

76 yo M with a PMH of aspiraiton PNA s/p CVA and COPD presents with sob.

VSS: 110, 28, 83% on RA ambulance got him to 93% on BiPAP 10/5 100% fio2, 105/60, 38.8 (oral)

Patient is 320 lbs and is a known difficult airway from prior intubations from similar events. He had to be rescued from failed RSI with an LMA and required aintree fiberoptic intubation by anesthesia.

You think the patient is going to fail BiPAP but you have bought yourself some time.

Patil.m4v

https://vimeo.com/107958796

Septic Shock in 2014

Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock in 2014

Although sepsis resuscitation has been beaten to death by most ED residencies, with all of the new articles coming to surface and a paradigm shift in management I thought it might be a good time to complete a recap of my biased approach to septic shock in 2014.  I welcome comments, suggestions and arguments as I know there will be some controversy in a few of the things we do.

65 y/o M presents to the emergency department with cough and fever for 2 days, and his wife noticed he was more sleepy than usual. His PMH is significant for COPD, HTN, DM II and his wife states she was recently sick with the “flu”.

VSS: 105, 85/55, 88% on 10L facemask, 39.6 (R), 26

My discussion will start with the first hour as I think these are all important things that can be done by the ED:

Obviously this is pounded into emergency physicians of fluids, antibiotics, and source control; here is maybe a few tips you haven’t heard about:

  1. Antibiotics:Give the most broad spectrum antibiotic FIRST in 99% of circumstances, like zosyn/cefepime or meropenem. These can be given as loading doses and rapid infusion over 30 minutes.  Follow with your other MRSA coverage, which is usually vancomycin, but can be linezolid, dapto (non-pulmonary infections), tigecycline or ceftaroline depending upon the situation. Most nursing protocols won’t allow both antibiotics to be given together.

The dose of 1 g of vancomycin load in adult patients is almost always inadequate. Even if you don’t know the renal function you can adjust future doses of vancomycin to help stay within therapeutic range (15-20).

Subsequent dosing for me of these medications has changed to extended infusion at Stanford, and in some rarer circumstances continuous antibiotic infusion. The reason for this is as more MDRO infections arise it is important to have time above the MIC with time-dependent killers (beta-lactams) to help provide clinical and microbiologic cure.

Cephalosporins and penicillins have been shown that the amount of time that free or non-protein bound drug concentration exceed MIC is the best predictor of bacterial killing and microbiologic response for beta-lactams.

abx.png

Fluid resuscitation:

Traditionally we have given as much fluid as possible until the patient goes into pulmonary edema. I think it is reasonable to give a bolus of IVF in most patients of 1L who are hypotensive, and a second liter if still hypotensive.

Some principles of fluid resuscitation:

1. I like Plasmalyte, or normosol, but understand logistically it isn’t possible or financially acceptable. Also there are basically no studies assessing these particular fluids.

2. Otherwise 99% of the time you can use Lactated ringer, yes it has 4 meq of potassium, most of the time this will not make a huge difference in patients serum K. If need be alternate between LR and NS. Chloride restrictive strategy resulted in less renal failure and RRT in one trial, also in the Process trial higher fluid resus and positive fluid balance was associated with more RRT.

3. Avoid only using NS, More and more evidence is arising that it results in more renal dysfunction (we are seeing this a lot in patients with brain injury on 3% hypertonic saline). It also creates an acidosis that is very annoying to me :)

4. Colloids- the Albios study was a negative NEJM study on pushing the serum albumin up using 20% albumin (not as a resus fluid so not as applicable to ED) but a post-hoc subgroup analysis suggested 90 day mortality benefit in patients with septic shock. In the subgroup analysis of the SAFE trial albumin improved mortality in septic shock.

Therefofre I think albumin is an expensive blood product and is hyperosmolar (Na ~160ish) and it’s use is very controversial. I use it in dialysis patients, patients with cirrhosis and in patients who have already gotten crystalloid boluses and appear to still be volume responsive.

I don’t use starches (6S, CHEST and CRISTAL trial).

4. Try and use fluids that are warmed every liter of room temperature fluid you give will drop the patient’s temperature by 0.25 degrees Celsius.

5. Asses fluid responsiveness after you have loaded the patient with some fluids, using passive leg raising, IVC collapse, echocardiography with VTI, pulse pressure variation or whatever is available to you. Positive fluid balance is a strong predictor of death, results in pulmonary edema and more renal failure. If the nurse calls you and you are busy your response shouldn’t be ordering more fluids without reassessing after your initial load, especially if the patient is not intubated.

Temperature management:

Fevers cause a whole myriad of problems like tachycardia, arrythmias, hypotension, hypoxia etc... but they are also protective in many animal studies by inducing production of protective heat shock proteins necessary for immune-mediated defense. I use tylenol for fever control 1g Q8, I do not use a cooling blanket or ibuprofen unless there is a really good reason ( i.e; the paitent has NMS or Malignant hyperthermia).

Blood Pressure Goals:

The big study SEPSISPAM by Asfar et al published in the NEJM 2014 compared 65-70 and 80-85. Basically no difference in mortality, but if you had baseline hypertension a higher MAP resulted in less renal replacement therapy (RRT). I shoot for 65-70, other people will stand up on their chairs and shout that this study proves what they suspected all along of patients with chronic hypertension needed higher perfusion pressures, go figure.

Vasopressors:

If you find that you have given fluids, and the patient is no longer fluid responsive or you notice that the blood pressure goes up for 10 minutes then back down it may be a problem of capillary leak and lack of vascular tone.  Place a CVC above the diaphragm if possible at this point. I do not think the process trial should be interpreted as its now ok to avoid central lines, as that was not studied specifically.

  1. Vasopressors are in a way giving a fluid bolus. They decrease the unstressed volume in the venous splanchnic system where most of our blood volume is stored (basically I think of unstressed volume as the amount of volume you have to put into something before you can generate a pressure in it). Our bodies have evolved to deal with hypovolemia, not hypervolemia.
  1. Levophed (norepinephrine) - First line vasopressor for me and by the surviving sepsis guidelines. I use this until my dose starts to escalate above 5 mcg/min.
  1. Vasopressin-I use this in patients who have levophed requirements above 5 mcg/min. My non-titrating dose of vaso is 0.04 U/min. Vasopressin has a different mechanism of action than all other vasopressors (that work as alpha agonists). Vasopressin inhibits potassium channels that result in production of nitric oxide a potent vasodilator and an inflammatory mediator in sepsis. This makes vasopressin both anti-inflammatory and a potent vasoconstrictor. The VASST trial by Jim Russel’s group in Vancouver showed it improved mortality in patients who had lower doses of vasopressors (just hypothesis generating). It also lowers the dose required of norepinephrine.  When combined with steroids appears to lower requirements for vasopressors all together (see below).
  1. Epinephrine- I use epinephrine if the patient has myocardial dysfunction based on bedside echo. I also reevaluate in real-time, VTI and EF after starting epinephrine.

A few things to know about epi:

 1. It will make you blood sugar higher and

2. It will make your lactate go up.

At does of 50 nanos/kg/min or 0.05 mcg/kg/min or less epi is considered mostly inotrope dosing. I therefore try and use it to help augment CO early in septic shock since most patients are peripherally vasodilated, later in there course is when they become vasoconstriced and dobutamine may be a better option.

  1. Phenylephrine: I don’t use phenylephrine except for unstable Afib to try and cause some bradycardia after bolus dosing and post-procedural hypotension from vasodilating agents like propofol.
  1. Milrinone- Cardiac ICU in patients with pulmonary artery catheters or select cases of patients with pulmonary hypertension. Probably not gonna get used in ED.
  1. Levosimendan – Don’t have any experience with the drug because it’s not available here. Probably something to be on the lookout for in near future.

Steroids:

I start them early and do not wait for a day of shock to initiate steroids.  If you require two vasopressors (that is vaso @ 0.04 U/min and norepi at 5 mcg/min) you get hydrocortionse 200mg 24-hour infusion.

An infusion is hard to get in the ED but 50mg IVP is pretty easy to find, and so 50 Q 6 is reasonable until they get upstairs. The physiology of a continuous infusion seems to make sense, and there are a few studies showing better glucose control and maintenance of cortisol levels.

Also I don’t usually check random cortisol levels or do a stim test, mostly because it takes time to come back, and because no one really knows the definition of adrenal insufficiency in the ICU. There are a ton of factors that go into a random cortisol level that I won’t get into here.

Hydrocortisone is dirt-cheap and the side effects of hyperglycemia are not as significant as you would expect. The superinfection rates are about the same between those getting low dose steroids and placebo (Sligli et al. Safety and Efficacy of Corticosteroids for the Treatment of Septic Shock: A systematic Review and Meta-Analysis). Also we know that steroids will reduce the incidence of vasopressor dependency. In my opinion (as well as many other ICU docs) the CORTICUS study waited WAY too long to enroll someone, there was already a general consensus in Europe that steroids worked (based on the Annane paper published earlier) and the patients were less critically ill than in the original paper. Therefore, in a select subset of patients (2 vasopressors; even if low dose), we start steroids, and RAPDILY taper in ICU as the vasopressors start to come down. 

Perfusion parameters:

Lactate-I order two to start, one at time 0, and one at To + 4 hours. This way no matter what that lab gets drawn 4 hours after the original in order to make sure we are making progress at the micro circulatory level.

Also if I have high levels of lactic acidosis not responding to most treatments (and no other apparent cause) I supplement thiamine, in case there is a reason they could be thiamine deficient, since this medication is cheap, and basically inert.

A caveat: lactate is not sensitive or specific for sepsis, it is a marker of poorer prognosis in patients in shock of any cause (post-arrest, septic, cardiogenic etc). If you get an elevated lactate do not assume the patient is septic and call the ICU fellow, do some digging first.

SvO2- probably don’t have to routinely measure this. If the patient is in shock needs vasopressors and has a central line above the diaphragm I will follow SvO2s as I am titrating vasopressors and Inotropes. I don’t transfuse PRBC’s or use dobutamine to push this “number” up.

I check a CVP, so I know what it is, and then look at it in conjunction with 700 other things. I do not bolus fluids to get a certain CVP number. The CVP is based on multiple things and does not predict fluid responsiveness nor does a static CVP give me much information. I would caution that if the CVP is high there is something wrong with the right side of the heart and it should prompt an echocardiogram. It could be LV failure, pulmonary hypertension, PE, RV dysfunction due to ischemia etc, but a CVP > 16 should give you pause, your cvp lying down is probably 0. 

Setting up the Vent:

This is a whole article in itself, but I leave you with the basics:

Your hospital needs to develop a lung protective protocol that is RT driven, to take you off the hook. We call this protocol LPV (lung protective ventilation). Basically the RT should start with 8cc/kg IBW for TV and a RR to match their current Minute ventilation. You can then titrate down on TV to 6cc/kg, as tolerated to keep plateau pressures < 30. You should titrate up on PEEP to keep sats up not the FiO2. If your patient is on 70% fiO2 and PEEP of 5, you probably need to rethink that strategy. If your patient is hypoxic do not be afraid of PEEP!  An RT driven protocol frees you up and allows them to make adjustments based on ARDSnet, which I know you don't want to be doing.

The FiO2 should be reduced to keep sats >88%, you don’t need an ABG, it should be weaned rapidly.

The pH can be tolerated down to as low as 7.2. Keep in mind MOST patients aren’t this sick to need lower pH’s and patients HATE having an elevated PCO2. It is terribly uncomfortable and often requires high doses of opiates and sedatives. Most patients do fine with AC/VC with low TV and rates between 16-20.

Our sedation/analgesia package right after intubation if they are hemodynamically stable is:

ANALGESIA FIRST:

-1-2mg of dilaudid IVP after securing airway and checking BP, then

1 mg/hr drip of dilaudid for avg adult male (less for granny and more for chronic opiate users), we have abandoned fentanyl drips due to the context sensitive half-life. Others use intermittent pushes of opiates, in the ED that is way too much work, they aren’t getting extubated in an hour or so, but if you are brave please go ahead.

Sedation:

I rarely use benzodiazepines, PERIOD. They increase ICU related delirium, drips result in prolonged wake-up times and if not vigilant about sedation vacations these can hang around for a good deal of time.  Once the patient has been on them for a while they can go into benzo withdrawl, another annoying thing to deal with. Basically STOP USING BENZO’s, enough literature is coming out to suggest benzo’s are dangerous. We have gone as far as not using benzo’s in alcohol withdrawl. We use clonidine, dexmedetomidine, gabapentin, and Depakote. (this is a whole different lecture again).

Dexmedetomidine will go generic this winter. Also even though the price tag gives administrators and pharmacists a heart attack, evidence suggests that on the back end dex provides cost savings with shorter ICU LOS, and reduced hospital costs.

It works in about 50-70% of patients to keep them calm on the vent but comfortable enough to interact. The dose is 0.2- 1.2 mcg/kg/hr. I don’t bolus and the major adverse events are bradycardia. Get familiar with this med as it will become a great ED med for obtaining CT’s, conscious sedation for anxiety provoking procedures like LP’s in the near future.

Propofol is excellent for its rapid on and off action but I avoid it in patients with hypotension, for obvious reasons. Avoid doses above 80 mcg/kg/min, as these are associated with propofol infusion syndrome(PRIS) after 24-48 hours. PRIS is devastating and took the life of a pregnant 35 y/o with eclampsia due to high doses at an OSH as we were the recieving hospital of the transfer for ECMO.

Ketamine works but I usually use it as an adjunctive medication to one of the above (ketamine/dex/dilaudid).

I tried to be somewhat breif and still controversial and maybe give a few pointers of thing you had forgotten, let me know what your thoughts are.

-Dave

Sepsis Treatment Update

Many thanks to Mike and Lisa Anderson for hosting, and to Sola, Dr. Febbo, Jessica, Trale, Adam B. and Natalie H. for their erudite presentations.

Background:  The 2001 NEJM study by Rivers established a new standard for sepsis care, demonstrating a significant improvement in severe sepsis/septic shock mortality using a protocol driven care algorithm during the initial 6 hours of resuscitation.  Since then, there has been ongoing discussion regarding which components of the algorithm are the most impactful.

Bottom line:  Sepsis rates have decreased by nearly 50% since 2000, and this is likely a real finding, in part due to increased awareness and more aggressive treatment of sepsis, as well as to other improvements in critical care. The ProCESS trial reinforces the 4 most crucial elements of successful sepsis management:  early recognition, early and adequate IV fluids, early IV antibiotics, and clinical reassessment of circulation.

Article 1:  Kaukonen K, Bailey M et al.  Mortality Related to Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock Among Critically Ill Patients in Australia and New Zealand, 2000-2012. JAMA.2014;311:1308-1316.

Editorial response:  Iwashyna T, Angus DC.  Declining Case Fatality Rates for Severe Sepsis:  Good Data Brings Good News with Ambiguous Implications.  JAMA.2014;311:1295-1297.

This retrospective observational study and accompanying editorial describe the changes in mortality for severe sepsis with and without shock in 101,064 patients from 171 ICUs in New Zealand and Australia between 2000 and 2012.  The primary endpoint was hospital outcome (mortality and discharge home, to other hospital, or to rehab facility).  Absolute mortality in severe sepsis decreased over this time period from 35% to 18.4%, for an annual average decrease of 1.3%.  Interestingly, mortality also decreased at a similar rate in non-septic ICU patients over this time period.  The annual rate of discharge to home was significantly greater in severe sepsis patients compared to patients with non-sepsis diagnoses. 

As discussed in the editorial, reports of changes in disease incidence or mortality can be misleading and instead reflect increased disease awareness and more liberal testing.  This study demonstrated robust methodology by using consistent international consensus definitions of sepsis over the time frame of the study, prospectively gathered data, and by attempting to control for confounding variables, all lending strength and veracity to its conclusions.  This study points out the importance of taking into consideration overall improvements in care when evaluating new therapies, as a new drug’s “benefit” may be inflated due to an ongoing independent positive trend in outcomes.  Also, short-term mortality by itself is an inadequate outcome metric, as a reduction in short-term mortality may come at the expense of trade-offs in morbidity and mortality.  See Katie Burns for diagrams and an interpretive explanation.

 

Article 2:  The ProCESS Investigators.  A Randomized Trial of Protocol-Based Care for Early Septic Shock.   NEJM March 18,2014. 

Editorial response:  Lily CM: The ProCESS Trial-A New Era of Sepsis Management. NEJM. March 18, 2014.

ACMC was an enrollment center for the ProCESS Trial, a non-blinded RCT of 1341 patients with septic shock, comparing 3 arms of care:  EGDT (Early Goal Directed Therapy, Rivers algorithm with mandated central line and central hemodynamic monitoring, specific physiologic targets); less aggressive protocol based care (no mandated central line, emphasis on clinical assessment of perfusion); or treating doctor’s “usual care.”  The primary end point was 60 day in-hospital mortality.  Secondary outcomes included longer-term mortality and organ failure/need for organ support.

At 60 days, mortality was 21% in the EGDT group, 18.2% in the less aggressive protocol group, and 18.9% in usual care group.  Protocols were not superior to usual care, and the EGDT protocol was not superior to the less aggressive protocol.  There were also no significant differences in any secondary outcomes, except for a higher need for new dialysis in the less aggressive protocol group (6%) than in the EGDT (3.1%) and usual care (2.8%) groups.

In the initial 6 hours of care, IVF and pressor rates did vary between groups (most IVF in the less aggressive protocol group, more pressors in both protocol groups than in usual care group).  More patients in EGDT group than in other 2 groups received inotropes and blood transfusions.  Antibiotics and steroid use were similar across all groups.

Discussion at JC:  The types of fluid/pressor were not specified, and neurologic outcome was not measured (although percentages of patients discharged to home were similar in the 3 groups).  Patients in both of the protocol groups basically had their own resuscitation doctor for 6 hours as emergency physicians were on call to come to the hospital and provide dedicated care for these 2 groups of patients during the initial 6 hours of the study.  This may reflect even better on the usual care group’s outcomes.  For Febbo, interesting that the group receiving the most crystalloid also had the highest renal failure rate....hyperchloremic metabolic acidosis from high volume Normal Salineàrenal failure??

Although institutions enrolling patients in ProCESS were not supposed to be actively using a sepsis protocol prior to becoming involved in the trial, 70% of participating institutions did have an existing sepsis protocol.  All groups in ProCESS received on average more than 2 liters of IVF prior to randomization, and 76% of patients received antibiotics prior to randomization, reflecting knowledge of EGDT in physicians treating “usual care” patients.

The 18% mortality rate in the “usual care” group of ProCESS is a dramatic improvement in baseline mortality compared with the 46.5% control group mortality in Rivers’ trial.   General improvements in critical care have also likely been impactful, including more liberal transfusion thresholds, lung protective ventilation strategies, and moderate glucose control.

So, do we need sepsis protocols at all?  Critical care resuscitation is complex.  Especially for residents and physicians with infrequent experience treating sepsis, protocols provide useful reminders of treatment goals and therapies.   Moving forward, the traditional EGDT protocol will likely evolve, with less pressure to insert central lines and measure CVP/ScvO2 unless the patient requires vasopressors.  However, reassessing perfusion using serial lactates, Shock Index, and clinical parameters including urine output and mentation remains critical. 

Bugs 'n' Drugs: Vancomycin Dosing

 

"Hey, Daddy-O.  Are you hip to that newfangled antibiotic, vancomycin?  That stuff is Fat City for beta-lactamase-producing bacteria," said every 1950s physician everywhere.

Ah, a simpler time.  One could just give a patient 1 gram every 12 hours and they'd be riding on easy street.  Today we have some scary bugs and not enough antibiotics to cover them.  To further complicate things, we are struggling with the phenomenon of the vancomycin MIC creep - it means our vancomycin susceptibilities are worsening.  The worst thing our 1950s counterparts had to worry about was not letting "Rock 'n' Roll" poison America's youth.  It's too late for that, but it's not too late to optimize our vanco dosing strategies to help decrease resistance!  Hooray!

Vancomycin is a weird drug.  The pharmacokinetics and dynamics are a bit more complex than other medications.  For instance, it is neither fully a time-dependent antibiotic (beta-lactams), nor a fully concentration-dependent antibiotic (aminoglycosides).  Many different kinetic models have been proposed, but the general consensus is that it involves the ratio of the area under the drug concentration-versus-time curve and the MIC.  We call it the AUC/MIC ratio.

This simply means the trough level we obtain is a marker for an appropriate AUC/MIC ratio.  We know that we need to target a trough of 10 mg/L for a bug with an MIC <1.  The trough required for an MIC = 1 is around 15 mg/L.  As the MIC approaches 2 or more, we can no longer use vanco as a treatment option.  We are seeing MICs of 1 and 1.5 far more than we previously have.  Two ways of combating the vancomycin MIC creep is to do the standard antimicrobial stewardship (no more vanco x1 dose and d/c on oral antibiotics), and appropriately dose the drug.  

Due to the complex kinetics involved, there are a multitude of dosing strategies.  Each institution may do things differently based on practicality and accuracy of the pharmacy kinetic team.  However, each strategy is based off of two things: body weight and renal function.

Standard Method:

  • Most common dosing technique
  • Load 20-25 mg/kg (max. 2000 mg)
  • 15 mg/kg at various intervals (every 8, 12, 24, etc. hours) based on renal function

Our pharmacy uses the Rodvold Method with a couple twists.  This is based of off years of kinetic data and how our pharmacy team has done in regards to obtaining a target trough.  I won't bore you with the details, but just know we rarely do a loading dose and rarely dose at 8-hour intervals.

I'll cut to the chase.  1,000 mg of vanco is not a one-size fits all dose.  We have to be sure we are setting up these patients for success during their hospital course.  Here is my recommendation for when your friendly ER pharmacists are not around: 

  • To the right of the vanco order in our system, click on the grey box with the ellipsis in it.  Select "Vanco Rx to Dose."  The RN will then call down to the main pharmacy where our team will conjure up a dose using our vanco voodoo.
  • Dose it yourself. It's super fun! I recommend a 15-20 mg/kg one-time dose using actual body weight, rounded to the nearest 250mg.  We will take care of the dosing interval when it gets continued in-house.  


Bottom line:

  • Vanco dosing is patient-specific
  • 15-20 mg/kg one-time dose with a max of 2 grams, or
  • Utilize "pharmacy to dose" function
  • Under-dosing vanco will increase the time required to get to a therapeutic trough
  • One gram q12h for everyone is not recommended

 

 

 

 

 

Chief complaint: trouble swallowing

MAY 2014

(sorry for the delay!)

CASE:

54-year-old male presents to the Emergency Department for evaluation of generalized weakness. He says that for the past 3 days he has had trouble speaking, trouble swallowing, dry mouth, and double vision. He says that his head feels “heavy” at night. He notes that symptoms started a few days after switching to a new dealer of his black tar heroin, which he injects into his thighs. He says his symptoms worsen throughout the day and with activity. This is his second ED visit for similar complaints – 3 days ago he presented to an outside ED for trouble swallowing and was told he needed endoscopy.

PMH: denies

PSH: ORIF R tibia

Meds: none

All: NKDA

SH: daily heroin use, social EtOH, + tobacco

VS: 98.7 163/92 80 18 100% RA

Remarkable exam findings:

HEENT: PERRL, discordant horizontal eye movements, ptosis noted b/l, dry mucous membranes

CV: RRR no murmurs

Neuro: slowly able to raise both eyebrows b/l though requires significant effort, speech clear though girlfriend at bedside notes it to be “different,” 4/5 strength on shoulder shrug, normal facial sensation, 5/5 strength b/l UE and LE, sensation intact b/l UE and LE, normal cerebellar exam, normal gait

Skin: warm, dry, no diaphoresis, skin popping sites visualized, scar tissue present without any evidence of induration or fluctuance

Labs:

CBC: WBC 5.7, Hgb/Hct 13.7/39.1, Platelets 236

Chem: 136/4.0/98/28/10/0.71/89

LFTs wnl

CXR wnl

APAP/Salicylate/EtOH undetedtable

Applicable case questions:

1. What is this patient’s differential diagnosis?

  • Wound botulism
  • Myasthenia gravis
  • Eaton-Lambert syndrome
  • Miller-Fisher variant of Guillain-Barre
  • Paralytic shellfish poisoning
  • Tick paralysis
  • Lyme disease
  • Endocarditis with septic emboli

2. What are the symptoms of wound botulism?

  • Dry or sore throat
  • +/- nausea and vomiting (more common with food-borne botulism)
  • +/- fever
  • Descending cranial nerve palsies
    • Ptosis
    • Diplopia
    • Sluggishly reactive pupils
    • Dysphagia
    • Dysarthria
    • Dysphonia
    • Progressive symmetric descending paralysis
    • Clear mentation
    • No sensory loss
    • Constipation and ileus from decreased motility
    • Ultimately culminates in profound weakness involving respiratory muscles, can cause respiratory failure and death
    • History of exposure:
      • Usually skin popping, black tar heroin
      • Wound may not be present – manifestations may occur 1-3 weeks after onset of skin infection

3. What are the different causes of botulism?

  • Food-borne botulism: ingestion of preformed toxin in contaminated food
    • GI symptoms followed by onset of neurologic symptoms usually delayed 12-36 hours
    • Home canning – classic culprit
    • Infant botulism: most commonly reported type
      • Caused by ingestion of spores (not preformed toxin) in immature infant gut
      • Risks: ingestion of corn syrup or honey
      • Hypotonia, constipation, tachycardia, feeding difficulty, poor head control, diminished reflexes
      • Wound botulism
        • Classic culprit: black tar heroin
        • Spores contaminate wound, germinate in the anaerobic environment, and produce toxin that is systemically absorbed
        • Usually reported with skin popping – rare reports with open fractures, dental abscesses, lacerations, puncture wounds, GSW, sinusitis
        • Adult intestinal colonization botulism: very rare – adult ingestion of spores (similar to infant botulism)
        • Iatrogenic botulism: occurs following ingestion of botulinum toxin type A
          • Botox (cosmetic purposes)
          • Also used to treat spasticity, axillary hyperhidrosis, strabismus
          • Symptoms occur 1-2 days after exposure
          • Inhalational botulism: usually thought to be an act of bioterrorism, toxin is aerosolized, symptoms visible 1-3 days after exposure with longer onset times for low levels of intoxication
botulism.jpg

4. How is wound botulism diagnosed?

  • Usually a clinical diagnosis made by symptoms, history of exposure, and attempts to rule out other causes of symptoms – need to intervene before confirmatory tests available
    • Interestingly – many patients with botulism end up presenting to the Emergency Department or primary care doctor at least 3 times prior to the diagnosis being considered, due to nonspecific symptoms (i.e. dysphagia)
    • Need to have a high index of suspicion
    • Support for diagnosis can be found in EMG findings that differentiate from other causes, normal neuroimaging, laboratory work to rule out other causes
    • Confirmatory testing done by determination of toxin in serum, stool, gastric aspirate, or a wound – usually via mouse bioassay (contaminated body fluid injected into mouse and observed for development of symptoms)
      • Coordinated through the CDC
      • Testing may be negative due to toxin levels below the level of detection
      • Higher false negative rate in wound botulism than other causes

5. What is the management of wound botulism?

  • Botulinum antitoxin
    • Antibodies directed against toxins produced by C. botulinum
    • Equine derived
    • Binds circulating free toxin, prevents progression of illness
    • Does not reverse established neurologic manifestations
    • Most effective when given within 24 hours of onset of symptoms
    • Obtained by contacting state or local health department or CDC
    • ICU admission with close monitoring of respiratory parameters (NIF, Vital capacity)
      • Respiratory failure can develop rapidly
      • Often require prolonged intubation/tracheostomy due to paralysis of respiratory muscles
      • BabyBIG (human derived antitoxin) used for infant botulism
      • Antibiotics can be considered if a wound is present, along with wound debridement and irrigation
        • Penicillin
        • Avoid aminoglycosides – can exacerbate neuromuscular blockade
        • Not usually recommended for other causes of botulism

CASE CLOSURE:

  • Patient was admitted to the ICU and intubated within 6 hours of admission
  • Antitoxin flown in and administered to patient as soon as possible – approximately 8 hours after initial ED presentation
  • Neurology team followed closely and evaluated for other causes
  • Prolonged ICU course requiring tracheostomy placement

TAKE-HOME PEARLS:

  • Consider wound botulism in a patient with descending motor weakness or bulbar symptoms (diplopia, dysarthria, dysphagia) + history of exposure (skin popping)
  • See New England Journal Article from December 2010 - images in clinical medicine
    • http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMicm1003352
    • Need a high index of suspicion to make the diagnosis: frequently missed by Emergency Physicians
    • Consider food-borne in patients involved in home canning, iatrogenic botulism in patients treated with Botox, infant botulism in infants with poor tone
    • Admit to ICU and closely monitor respiratory parameters
    • Antitoxin is obtained from the local health department or CDC: 404-639-2999
    • Antitoxin should be administered as soon as the diagnosis is seriously considered, as it only prevents further paralysis – it does not reverse established paralysis once it occurs
Botox_cartoon_1.jpg