The results of this meta-analysis declared the significant role of rhabdomyolysis etiology (traumatic/non-traumatic) in predictive performance of CK. There was a significant correlation between mean CK level and risk of crush-induced AKI. The pooled OR of CK was considerable, but its screening performance characteristics were not desirable.

BackgroundMany patients are brought to crowded emergency departments (ED) of hospitals every day for evaluation of head injuries, headaches, neurologic deficits etc. CT scan of the head is the most common diagnostic measure used to search for pathologies. In many EDs the initial interpretation of images are performed by emergency physicians (EP). Since most decisions are made based on the initial interpretation of the images by emergency physicians and not the radiologists, it is necessary to assess the accuracy of interpretations made by the former group.ObjectivesThe objective of this study was to compare the findings reported in the interpretation of head CTs by emergency physicians and compare to radiologists (the gold standard).Materials and MethodsThis was a prospective cross sectional study conducted from March to May 2009 in a teaching hospital in Tehran, Iran. All non-contrast head CTs obtained during the study period were copied on DVDs and sent separately to a radiologist, 6 emergency medicine (EM) attending physicians and 14 senior EM residents for interpretation. Clinical information pertaining to each patient was also sent with each CT. The radiologist’s interpretation was considered as the gold standard and reference for comparison. Data from EM physicians and residents were compared with the reference as well as with each other and statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 18.5.ResultsOut of 544 CT scans, EM physicians had 35 false negatives and 53 false positives compared with radiologist’s interpretations (P < 0.0001). EM residents had 74 false negatives and 12 false positives compared with radiologist’s interpretations (P < 0.0001).ConclusionsBoth EPs and ER residents either missed or falsely called a significant number of pathologies in their interpretations. The interpretations of EPs and ER residents were more sensitive and more specific, respectively. These findings revealed the need for increased training time in head CT reading for residents and the necessity of attending continuing medical education workshops for emergency physicians.

Background: We aimed to examine the available evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of corticosteroids on the management of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS-CoV). Method: An extensive search was conducted in Medline, Embase, and Central databases until the end of March 2020, using keywords related to corticosteroids, COVID-19, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV. The main outcome was considered to be the mortality rate, length of stay, virus clearance time, symptom improvement, and lung function improvement. The findings are presented as odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (95% CI). Results: Fifteen paper compromising 5 studies on COVID-19, 8 studies on SARS-CoV and 2 studies on MERS-CoV were included. One study was clinical trial and the rest were cohort. The analyses showed that corticosteroids were not reduce the mortality rate of COVID-19 (OR=1.08; 95% CI: 0.34 to 3.50) and SARSCoV (OR=0.77; 95% CI: 0.34 to 1.3) patients, while they were associated with higher mortality rate of patients with MERS-CoV (OR = 2.52; 95% CI: 1.41 to 4.50). Moreover, it appears that corticosteroids administration would not be effective in shortening viral clearance time, length of hospitalization, and duration of relief symptoms following viral severe acute respiratory infections. Conclusion: There is no evidences that corticosteroids are safe and effective on the treatment of severe acute respiratory infection when COVID-19 disease is suspected. Therefore, corticosteroids prescription in COVID19 patients should be avoided.

BackgroundChoosing a proper medication for pain management of patients with acute renal colic has been a challenge for physicians treating these patients.ObjectivesThe present study was performed with the aim of comparing intravenous (IV) ibuprofen and IV ketorolac in pain management of these patients.MethodsIn the present double-blind clinical trial study, patients suspected with renal colic presented to the emergency department were randomly divided into 2 groups receiving IV ibuprofen or IV ketorolac and were compared regarding effectiveness (pain reduction 15, 30, and 60 minutes after injection), treatment success, and possible side effects.ResultsIn total, 240 patients suspected with renal colic with the mean age of 27.38 ± 12.32 years were randomly divided into 2 groups of 120 individuals treated with IV ketorolac or ibuprofen (66.4% male). The two groups were in a similar condition regarding age (P = 0.56), sex (P = 0.78) history of kidney stone (P = 0.40), vital signs (P > 0.05), stone size (P = 0.73), stone location (P = 0.13), and pain severity on admission (P = 0.32). 15, 30, and 60 minutes after drug injection, pain severity in the ketorolac group was significantly higher than the group receiving ibuprofen (P < 0.0001 for all comparisons), yet these differences were not clinically significant. Fifteen minutes after the injection, the rate of treatment success was significantly higher in the group receiving IV ibuprofen (P < 0.0001). After 60 minutes, the number of completely relieved cases reached 37 (30.8%) patients in the ketorolac group and 83 (69.1%) patients in the ibuprofen group. No significant difference was seen in side effects between the two groups (P = 0.35).ConclusionsThe findings of the present study show that ibuprofen is a more rapid acting drug compared to ketorolac in controlling pain caused by renal colic. In addition, its rate of complete relief from pain was twice as much as that of ketorolac. Since the side effects observed for ibuprofen in the present study were very mild, it is suggested to use this drug in treatment and pain control of renal colic patients.

Advantages of the endonasal approach such as saving the medial palpebral ligament, the lacrimal pump mechanism, and the horizontal apparatus are obvious. If necessary, additional management of sinus, septal, and conchal disease can be performed simultaneously. Our results reveal that the microscopic endonasal approach is a safe and reliable procedure in the management of postsaccular or saccular nasolacrimal duct obstruction and is an alternative to the traditional external route.

<p class="Abstract">The aim of this study was to determine if intravenous caffeine is as effective as intravenous ketorolac for the treatment of moderate to severe migraine headaches. Eligible patients randomly received 60 mg caffeine citrate or 60 mg ketorolac infused intravenously. Their pain score were measured at baseline, one hour and two hours after infusion. Therapeutic success was defined as decreasing of at least 3 points on the pain score. In total 110 patients were enrolled (75.5% women). Therapeutic success after 60 min was achieved by 63.6% of patients in the caffeine and 70.1% of patients in the ketorolac group (p = 0.23). After 120 min, 87.3% of the caffeine group and 83.6% of the ketorolac group achieved therapeutic success (p = 0.49). In this multi-center, randomized double blind study, intravenous caffeine was as effective as intravenous ketorolac for first line abortive management of acute migraine.</p><p> </p>

Based on TIRC, it seems that CXR in stable multiple blunt trauma patients who are conscious and under 60 and have no decrease in pulmonary sounds, no dyspnea, no thoracic skin abrasion, and no crepitation can be ignored.

Antioxidant micronutrients in the extract of Persian shallot may rehabilitate liver damages caused by free radicals in diabetic rats.