BackgroundPredictive indexes of weaning from mechanical ventilation are often inaccurate. Among the many indexes used in clinical practice, the rapid shallow breathing index is one of the most accurate. We evaluated a new weaning index consisting in the diaphragm thickening fraction (DTF) assessed by ultrasound.MethodsForty-six patients were prospectively enrolled. All patients were ventilated in pressure support through a tracheostomy tube. Patients underwent a spontaneous breathing trial (SBT) when they met all the following criteria: FiO2 < 0.5, PEEP ≤5 cmH2O, PaO2/FiO2 > 200, respiratory rate <30 breaths per minute, absence of fever, alert and cooperative, and hemodynamic stability without vaso-active therapy support. During the trial, the right hemi-diaphragm was visualized in the zone of apposition using a 10-MHz linear ultrasound probe. The patient was then instructed to perform breathing to total lung capacity (TLC) and then exhaling to residual volume (RV). Diaphragm thickness was recorded at TLC and RV, and the DTF was calculated as percentage from the following formula: Thickness at end inspiration - Thickness at end expiration / Thickness at end expiration. Also, the rapid shallow breathing index (RSBI) was calculated. Weaning failure was defined as the inability to maintain spontaneous breathing for at least 48 h, without any form of ventilatory support.ResultsA significant difference between diaphragm thickness at TLC and RV was observed both in patients who succeeded SBT and patients who failed. DTF was significantly different between patients who failed and patients who succeeded SBT. A cutoff value of a DTF >36% was associated with a successful SBT with a sensitivity of 0.82, a specificity of 0.88, a positive predictive value (PPV) of 0.92, and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 0.75. By comparison, RSBI <105 had a sensitivity of 0.93, a specificity of 0.88, a PPV of 0.93, and a NPV of 0.88 for determining SBT success.ConclusionsThis study shows that in our cohort of patients, the assessment of DTF by diaphragm ultrasound may perform similarly to other weaning indexes. If validated by other studies, this method may be used in clinical practice.

Dyspnea is a common symptom in patients admitted to the Emergency Department (ED), and discriminating between cardiogenic and non-cardiogenic dyspnea is often a clinical dilemma. The initial diagnostic work-up may be inaccurate in defining the etiology and the underlying pathophysiology. The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy and reproducibility of pleural and lung ultrasound (PLUS), performed by emergency physicians at the time of a patient's initial evaluation in the ED, in identifying cardiac causes of acute dyspnea. Between February and July 2007, 56 patients presenting to the ED with acute dyspnea were prospectively enrolled in this study. In all patients, PLUS was performed by emergency physicians with the purpose of identifying the presence of diffuse alveolar-interstitial syndrome (AIS) or pleural effusion. All scans were later reviewed by two other emergency physicians, expert in PLUS and blinded to clinical parameters, who were the ultimate judges of positivity for diffuse AIS and pleural effusion. A random set of 80 recorded scannings were also reviewed by two inexperienced observers to assess inter-observer variability. The entire medical record was independently reviewed by two expert physicians (an emergency medicine physician and a cardiologist) blinded to the ultrasound (US) results, in order to determine whether, for each patient, dyspnea was due to heart failure, or not. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive/negative predictive values were obtained; likelihood ratio (LR) test was used. Cohen's kappa was used to assess inter-observer agreement. The presence of diffuse AIS was highly predictive for cardiogenic dyspnea (sensitivity 93.6%, specificity 84%, positive predictive value 87.9%, negative predictive value 91.3%). On the contrary, US detection of pleural effusion was not helpful in the differential diagnosis (sensitivity 83.9%, specificity 52%, positive predictive value 68.4%, negative predictive value 72.2%). Finally, the coexistence of diffuse AIS and pleural effusion is less accurate than diffuse AIS alone for cardiogenic dyspnea (sensitivity 81.5%, specificity 82.8%, positive predictive value 81.5%, negative predictive value 82.8%). The positive LR was 5.8 for AIS [95% confidence interval (CI) 4.8-7.1] and 1.7 (95% CI 1.2-2.6) for pleural effusion, negative LR resulted 0.1 (95% CI 0.0-0.4) for AIS and 0.3 (95% CI 0.1-0.8) for pleural effusion. Agreement between experienced and inexperienced operators was 92.2% (p < 0.01) and 95% (p < 0.01) for diagnosis of AIS and pleural effusion, respectively. In early evaluation of patients presenting to the ED with dyspnea, PLUS, performed with the purpose of identifying diffuse AIS, may represent an accurate and reproducible bedside tool in discriminating between cardiogenic and non-cardiogenic dyspnea. On the contrary, US detection of pleural effusions does not allow reliable discrimination between different causes of acute dyspnea in unselected ED patients.

No abstract

No abstract

We report the first empirical data showing a significant amount of double conjunction fallacies in physicians' probability judgments concerning prognosis and diagnosis. Our results support the hypothesis that physicians' probability judgments are guided by assessments of evidential impact between diagnostic conditions and clinical signs. Moreover, we show that, contrary to some influential views, double conjunction fallacies represent an experimentally replicable reasoning bias. We discuss how the phenomenon eludes major current accounts of uncertain reasoning in medicine and beyond and how it relates to clinical practice.