The I-FABP level is a more reliable parameter for diagnosing acute mesenteric ischemia compared to leukocytosis and D-dimer elevation.

AimThe aim of the study was to compare the New Orleans Criteria and the New Orleans Criteria according to their diagnostic performance in patients with mild head injury.MethodsThe study was designed and conducted prospectively after obtaining ethics committee approval. Data was collected prospectively for patients presenting to the ED with Minor Head Injury. After clinical assessment, a standard CT scan of the head was performed in patients having at least one of the risk factors stated in one of the two clinical decision rules.Patients with positive traumatic head injury according to BT results defined as Group 1 and those who had no intracranial injury defined as Group 2. Statistical analysis was performed with SPSS 11.00 for Windows. ROC analyze was performed to determine the effectiveness of detecting intracranial injury with both decision rules. p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.Results175 patients enrolled the study. Male to female ratio was 1.5. The mean age of the patients was 45 ± 21,3 in group 1 and 49 ± 20,6 in group 2. The most common mechanism of trauma was falling. The sensitivity and specificity of CCHR were respectively 76.4% and 41.7%, whereas sensitivity and specificity of NOC were 88.2% and 6.9%.ConclusionThe CCHR has higher specificity, PPV and NPV for important clinical outcomes than does the NOC.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Introduction: Mesenteric ischemia/reperfusion (I/R) injury is a serious clinical condition. There were a lot of experimental studies performed in the treatment of I/R injury. To our knowledge, this is the first experimental study with effects of sesamin on I/R injury model. We aimed to investigate the protective effect of sesamin on mesenteric I/R injury model. Material and methods: A total of 32 male Sprague-Dawley rats were divided into four groups. Control group: superior mesenteric artery (SMA) exposed without clamping. I/R group: SMA was clamped for 60 min and then reperfused for 2 h. Sesamin group (S): 30 mg/kg sesamin were given for 5 days, and SMA exposed without clamping. I/R + S group: 30 mg/kg sesamin were given for 5 days, SMA was clamped for 60 min, and then reperfused for 2 h. Plasma and tissue oxidant parameters were investigated as well as histopathological evaluation. Results: Plasma and tissue total antioxidant status (TAS) levels were significantly higher in I/R + S group compared to the rest (p < 0.005). The plasma TAS levels in I/R group was significantly low. The highest tissue TAS levels were detected in I/R + S group. The high levels of plasma and tissue TOS were found in I/R + S group. Plasma and tissue OSI levels were significantly higher in I/R group. Histopathologic evaluation showed that the mean level of intestinal tissue injury score in I/R group was 2.75 and 1.38 in I/R + S group. Conclusions: Sesamin helps to protect the intestinal tissue at the cellular level by reducing the oxidative stress and inflammation at both the plasma and tissue levels in the experimental I/R model.

Background:Neutrophil Gelatinase-associated Lipocalin (NGAL) protein is easily detected in the blood and urine soon after acute renal injury. NGAL gains features of an early, sensitive and noninvasive biomarker for acute renal injury. Recent evidences suggest that its expression is also increased in CRF reflecting the severity of disease.Objectives:In the present study, we aimed to investigate whether blood NGAL level plays a role in the differential diagnosis of acute and chronic renal failure.Patients and Methods:This was a prospective case-control study. Fifty patients presented to emergency department with acute renal failure (ARF), 30 with chronic renal failure (CRF) and 20 healthy individuals as control group were included in this study. Blood pH, HCO3-, BUN, creatinine and potassium values were evaluated in all patients. Blood NGAL values were evaluated in all groups. BUN, serum creatinine and NGAL values were statistically compared between patients and controls.Results:Median NGAL levels in patients was 304.50 (29), and 60 (0) in control, which was statistically significant between the two groups (Z = -6.477, P < 0.001). The median NGAL values were 261.50 ± 291 in ARF group and 428.50 ± 294 in CRF group. There was a significant difference in NGAL level between ARF and CRF groups (Z = -2.52, P = 0.012). Median BUN values were 153.46 ± 82.47 in ARF group and 169.40 ± 93.94 in CRF group. There was no significant difference in BUN value between ARF and CRF groups (P > 0.05). Median creatinine values were 2.84 ± 2.95 in ARF group and 4.78 ± 4.32 in CRF group. In serum creatinine values, a significant difference was found between ARF and CRF groups (P < 0.05).Conclusions:Serum NGAL levels of ARF and CRF patients were significantly higher than healthy individuals. In addition, NGAL values of patients with CRF were significantly higher than those of ARF. Serum NGAL values can be used to detect renal injury and differentiate ARF and CRF.

Introduction: Although intrahospital transportation of critical patients from the emergency department (ED) is inevitable, it could also result in life-threatening situations. These situations, referred to as unwanted or unexpected events, mainly happen during the transportation of patients for diagnostic imaging or invasive procedures and result in a wide spectrum from vital condition changes, mental condition changes to cardiopulmonary arrest and death. Emergency departments have a high risk of facing such situations because these units are the first admission door of critical patients. Material and methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted prospectively, after interviewing the doctors who work in the ED actively, and by filling out the forms which were already prepared by the participants. Statistical analysis was performed according to the data received, and results were compared to the literature. Results: Three hundred and forty-seven doctors from 52 hospitals were included in the study. 59.4% (n = 206) of them were working at EDs which had more than 500 patients admitted. 51.9% (n = 180) of doctors stated that they performed 10 or more critical patients' transport every day from their ED. 86.7% (n = 301) of the participants stated that usage of control checklists would decrease the rate of unwanted situations and stated that they wanted to use them. Conclusions: Intrahospital transportation of critical patients from the emergency room is a subject that should require attention by emergency room doctors, and using educated personnel, proper equipment, standardized protocols and control checklists will decrease the frequency of unwanted situations effectively.