Background and Purpose: Abdominal pain during pregnancy is quite common; however, surgical pathology such as acute appendicitis as a cause of such pain is not. Diagnostic tests used in addition to history and physical examination (PE) are ultrasound (US) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). We elected to find the role of these tests in pregnant patients who presented to our emergency department with acute abdominal pain. Materials And Methods: Retrospective analysis of 136 pregnant women with acute abdominal pain presented to the emergency department (ED). We reviewed PE, US, MRI, gestational age, comorbid conditions, and length of stay. Statistical analysis was done using student’s t-test and chi-square test. Institutional review board approval was obtained. Results: Mean age was 26 (±4.6) and the mean gestational age was 24 (±9.9) weeks. Of those patients, there were 81 patients who had an US and MRI performed. The US was positive in 16 patients, while the MRI was positive in 25 patients. Three patients went for appendectomy. The US sensitivity was 0% and specificity 79%. Positive predictive value for US was 0% and negative predictive value was 95%, which was less than 100%. The MRI likelihood ratios were calculated for each test’s clinical application and demonstrated that the US test result was indeterminate for ruling in and for ruling out appendicitis while the MRI allowed for high ability to rule out the disease. Conclusion: In pregnant women with acute abdominal pain and a positive PE highly suggestive of surgical pathology, US had limited value and patients should proceed to MRI.
Retrospective analysis, validating the brain injury guideline (BIG) in the management of traumatic head injury in our level II trauma center after implementation of the protocol, and compare the outcomes to those seen before the protocol, of 542 patients seen in the Emergency Department (ED), with head injury between 2017 and 2021 was completed. Those patients were divided into two groups: Group 1 (pre BIG protocol implementation) and Group 2 (post BIG protocol implementation). Data included age, race, length of stay (hospital and ICU), comorbid conditions, anticoagulant therapy, surgical intervention, GCS, ISS, findings of head CT and any subsequent progression, mortality, and readmission within one month. Student’s t-test and Chi-square test were used for statistical analysis. There were 314 patients in group 1 and 228 patients in group 2. Mean age of group 2 was significantly higher than group 1 (67 vs 59 years, p=0.0001), however their gender was similar. Data available on 526 patients were classified as BIG 1=122, BIG 2=73, and BIG 3=331 patients. Post-implementation group were older (70 vs 44 years, P=0.0001) with more females (67% vs 45%, P=0.05) and had significantly more than 4 comorbid conditions (29% vs 8%, P=0.004), with the majority presented with a size of 4 mm or less of acute subdural or subarachnoid hematoma. No patient in either group had progression of their neurological examination, neurosurgical intervention, or readmission.. Elderly trauma patients may benefit from implementation of BIG criteria protocol, thus reducing cost of patient care, however a larger sample size is needed.
Small bowel obstruction secondary to primary cancer, such as carcinoid and adenocarcinoma, is not unusual. Less frequently, hematological metastasis from breast, lung, and melanoma can occur. However, metastasis from urothelial bladder carcinoma is extremely rare. In this index case, we describe a 71-year-old Caucasian man with a prior history of urothelial bladder carcinoma. He was treated successfully with chemoradiation and local resection a year prior to his current presentation with small bowel obstruction which required surgical resection of a loop of jejunum, which was found to be caused by obstructive, metastatic urothelial bladder carcinoma on pathology. Therefore, one should consider the possibility of secondary obstructive malignant lesions arising from the urinary bladder in such a patient when presented with bowel obstruction and a history of urothelial bladder carcinoma.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.