Clinical reasoning in anaphylactic shock: addressing the challenges faced by anaesthesiologists in real time: A clinical review and management algorithms.

Eur J Anaesthesiol

From the Anaesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine Department, DMU PARABOL, Bichat Hospital, AP-HP (AGC, EK, PM, DL), Antibody in Therapy and Pathology, Pasteur Institute, UMR 1222 INSERM, Paris, France (AGC), Biostatistics Research Branch, Division of Clinical Research, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA (AGC), Pulmonology Department, Bichat Hospital, AP-HP, Paris University (CN), INSERM UMR 1152, Paris University, DHU FIRE, Paris (CN, PM), Anaesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine Department, Maison Blanche Hospital, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Reims, Reims (JM-M), Anaesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine Department, Nouvel Hôpital Civil, Hôpitaux Universitaires de Strasbourg (CT, PM-M), Paris University (PM, DL), EA 3072, Institut de Physiologie, FMTS, Faculté de Médecine de Strasbourg, Université de Strasbourg, Strasbourg (PM-M) and INSERM1148, Paris, France (DL).

Published: November 2021

Acute hypersensitivity reactions to drugs occur infrequently during anaesthesia and the peri-operative period. When clinical presentation includes the classical triad, erythema, cardiovascular abnormalities and increased airway pressure, the diagnosis is evident and the challenge is to prescribe a therapeutic regimen according to guidelines and to manage refractory signs in a timely manner. In many situations, however, the initial clinical signs are isolated, such as increased airway pressure or arterial hypotension. Rendering a differential diagnosis with causes and mechanisms other than acute hypersensitivity reactions (AHRs) is difficult, delaying treatment with possible worsening of the clinical signs, and even death, in previously healthy individuals. In these difficult diagnostic situations, clinical reasoning is mandatory, and guidelines do not explicitly explain the elements on which clinical reasoning can be built. In this article, based on clinical evidence whenever available, experimental data and pathophysiology, we propose algorithms that have been evaluated by experts. The goal of these algorithms is to provide explicit elements on which the differential diagnosis of AHRs can be made, accelerating the implementation of adequate therapy.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/EJA.0000000000001536DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

clinical reasoning
12
clinical
8
acute hypersensitivity
8
hypersensitivity reactions
8
increased airway
8
airway pressure
8
clinical signs
8
differential diagnosis
8
reasoning anaphylactic
4
anaphylactic shock
4

Similar Publications

Background And Objective: Despite significant investments in the normalization and the standardization of Electronic Health Records (EHRs), free text is still the rule rather than the exception in clinical notes. The use of free text has implications in data reuse methods used for supporting clinical research since the query mechanisms used in cohort definition and patient matching are mainly based on structured data and clinical terminologies. This study aims to develop a method for the secondary use of clinical text by: (a) using Natural Language Processing (NLP) for tagging clinical notes with biomedical terminology; and (b) designing an ontology that maps and classifies all the identified tags to various terminologies and allows for running phenotyping queries.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background: Current evidence on non‐pharmacological treatments in Dementia with Lewy Bodies (DLB) are relatively few and limited by small sample sizes. The goal of this pilot study was to test the efficacy of a new multimodal treatment that combines Tele‐Neurorehabilitation and “Bright Light” Therapy (BLT) in a sample of DLB patients.

Method: Eighteen DLB patients (7F; 74.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background: In a landscape where both cognitive decline and diabetes are on the ascent globally, an increasingly pertinent question emerges: what interconnections exist between dementia and diabetes in older individuals? Cognitive impairment is a decline in mental abilities that affects memory, attention, reasoning, and other cognitive functions leading to dementia. Diabetes is associated with an increased risk of cognitive impairment and dementia, as well as vascular complications that damage the brain. Several studies have shown that type 2 diabetes and hypertension can impair blood‐brain barrier integrity, cerebral circulation, glucose metabolism, inflammation, oxidative stress, and amyloid‐beta production in the brain.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background: Developing culture‐fair tests that measure constructs equivalently across different ethno‐lingual groups is challenging, given the diverse cultural variations that impact neurocognitive measurement. Multi‐level measurement invariance must be established before interpreting scores similarly across groups, both within and between cultures for meaningful comparisons.

Method: We set out to test whether a neurocognitive tool (BENCI) behaves the same way across the males (n = 311) and the females group (n = 291) using measurement invariance testing with multigroup confirmatory factor analysis.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background: After the landmark approval of the Aβ‐lowering antibody for treatment of mild cognitive impairment and mild dementia due to Alzheimer’s disease (AD), it has intensified the need to stratify patients based on the likelihood that they will benefit from any amyloid‐lowering treatments currently in the pipeline. We therefore seek to identify individuals most likely to benefit from Aβ‐lowering drugs by estimating intervention effect based on counterfactual reasoning for longitudinal cognitive decline at the individual level.

Method: We utilized 3,542 T1‐weighted magnetic resonance images from the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI), involving 3,103 Alzheimer’s patients and 439 cognitively normal individuals.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!