Designer Weebly Themes weebly review wix review squarespace review jimdo review
LAS VEGAS EMERGENCY MEDICINE RESIDENCY
LasVegasEMR
  • HOME
  • PROGRAM
    • Curriculae >
      • Clinical
      • Didactic
      • Orientation
    • Applicants/Students >
      • Medical Students
      • Interview Info
      • Active Duty Military Applicants
    • Research >
      • Current Research
      • Research Assistants
    • Ultrasound >
      • Ultrasound Resources
    • Nuts and Bolts
    • Where We Live >
      • Las Vegas
      • Southern Nevada
  • DEPARTMENT
    • UMC Adult ED
    • UMC Pediatric ED
    • UMC Trauma ED
    • Other Sites
  • PEOPLE
    • Faculty
    • Residents >
      • PGY-1
      • PGY-2
      • PGY-3
      • Alumni (Click for Map) >
        • Class of 2018
        • Class of 2017
        • Class of 2016
        • Class of 2015
        • Class of 2014
        • Class of 2013
      • Resident Life
  • SERVICE
    • Event Medicine
    • Tactical Medicine
    • Wilderness Medicine
    • EMS
    • Ski Patrol
  • FOAM Blog
  • INTRANET
    • Academic Calendar
    • Departmental Intranet >
      • Picture Archive
      • Conference Resources
    • Rotating Residents
  • Faculty
  • Research Assistants

F.O.A.M. BLOG

Las Vegas FOAM Blog is dedicated to sharing cutting edge learning with anyone, anywhere, anytime.  We hope to inspire discussion, challenge dogma, and keep readers up to date on the latest in emergency medicine. This site is managed by the residents of Las Vegas’ Emergency Medicine Residency program and we are committed to promoting the FOAMed movement.

An Evidence-Based Approach to ED Paracentesis

7/7/2016

1 Comment

 
By Aaron Heckelman MD PGY-3
​
There are two reasons to do a paracentesis in the emergency department: a “diagnostic paracentesis” to evaluate the cause of ascites and look for evidence of infection, and a “therapeutic paracentesis” to relieve discomfort and shortness of breath in a patient with large-volume, tense ascites. The first requires only a few milliliters of fluid be removed, but the second invol
ves removing several liters, and may make ED providers nervous about causing dangerous “fluid shifts” and resultant hypotension and electrolyte imbalances. In both cases, abnormal coagulation studies may discourage the ED provider from attempting either procedure at all. The following is what the literature and specialty societies have to say about these issues:

Do “fluid shifts” really happen after large-volume paracentesis?
Summary: Yes, and they can be dangerous.

The “fluid shifts” we fear are technically called Paracentesis-Induced Circulatory Dysfunction (PICD). PICD is a well-described complication of large-volume paracentesis (defined as >5L removed), and can occur anytime from a few hours to a few days after the procedure. Symptoms are hypotension, hyponatremia, onset of hepatorenal syndrome, faster reaccumulation of ascites, and short-term mortality.1,4  

How many liters can you safely take off at once?
Summary: GI docs routinely drain the entire abdomen, regardless of how many liters are in there. There is good evidence that giving IV albumin reduces the incidence of PICD, and experts agree if you take off >5L you should give IV albumin, 6-8g/L removed. If you are removing <5L, there is some evidence (and an expert consensus in America) that the chance of PICD is low and you do not need to give albumin. European experts agree that the risk of PICD is low in this situation, but still recommend giving albumin. Most people use 25% albumin (rather than the 5% formulation.

The most recent (2012) recommendations from the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases are2:
Post-paracentesis albumin infusion may not be necessary for a single paracentesis of less than 4 to 5 L. (Class I, Level C)
For large-volume paracenteses, an albumin infusion of 6-8 g per liter of fluid removed appears to improve survival and is recommended. (Class IIa, Level A)
The most recent (2010) recommendation from the European Association for the Study of the Liver is3:
In patients undergoing paracentesis of less than 5 L of ascites, the risk of developing post-paracentesis circulatory dysfunction is low. However, it is generally agreed that these patients should still be treated with albumin… (Class I, Level B).

In GI clinics, standard practice for therapeutic paracentesis is to drain the entire abdomen, with no upper limit on the number of liters removed. This has been shown to be safe, as long as IV albumin 6-8g/L removed is given soon after, and improves patient symptoms and quality of life.4-6 The 25% albumin formulation is typically used (rather than the 5% solution) to minimize the amount of IV fluid and sodium given (at UMC, it is also cheaper this way).

The idea that tang off <5L without giving albumin is safe is based on expert consensus, and on one small trial of 12 patients, none of whom had any symptoms or laboratory evidence of even minor PICD after such paracenteses.7

So albumin really matters?
Summary: Yes it most likely does. There is good evidence that giving albumin reduces incidence of PICD, which is a predictor of shortened survival.

Technically only one study, which used no power calculation, has attempted to directly compare 40-week mortality in large volume paracentesis patients with and without albumin. It found no significant difference between the two, though it did find increased rates of PICD in patients not given albumin.16 This PICD finding has been replicated in several other studies, all of which were compiled in a 2012 meta-analysis by Bernardi et al.6 The meta-analysis found that albumin not only reduces PICD in patients receiving large-volume paracentesis, it is likely superior to all other volume expanders and vasoconstrictors that have been tried. Because of albumin’s expense, researchers had studied hypertonic saline, dextran, hetastarch and other synthetic colloids, and had also tried midodrine, terlipressin and norepinephrine. Of these, terlipressin (not available in the USA), had some smaller studies showing noninferiority to albumin, but in the meta-analysis albumin came out ahead.

Because PICD has, in other studies, been associated with decreased survival17,18, it is reasonable to imply, with the understanding that it hasn’t been directly and rigorously proven, that albumin may have a mortality benefit in these large volume paracentesis patients. This is what led to the AASLD and EASL recommendations outlined above.2,3

PT/aPTT – How high is too high? Platelets – How low is too low?
Summary: There are no cutoffs suggested by the evidence or by specialty societies, because these tests are not useful for predicting bleeding in this setting. Up to about 2% of paracentesis patients will have a bleeding complication, but PT/aPTT and platelet count are very poor predictors. Look for other evidence that the patient is likely to bleed, like extensive bruising or a history of bleeding problems as a better predictor.

It is well established in the hematology literature that, though many liver patients are indeed prone to easy bleeding, even markedly abnormal PT/aPTT and platelet counts are poor predictors of bleeding risk in liver failure patients.8-10 Despite this, many physicians balk at performing paracentesis in patients with markedly abnormal coagulation tests, and some even prophylactically give platelets or FFP to all patients pre-procedure. These practices have no evidence base, and are not endorsed by any professional society.2,3

The safety of paracentesis in liver failure patients with abnormal coagulation markers has been well studied, and no studies have found an overall bleeding complication higher than around 2%.11-13 None have found an association with any particular cutoff for INR or platelet count, despite many subjects having INR>2.5 and Plt<50.11-15

In other words, up to 2% of liver failure patients undergoing paracentesis will have a bleeding complication, but there is no evidence that coagulation studies predict who those 2% will be. Some experts recommend looking for other evidence of bleeding risk on history and physical (such as extensive bruising, history of bleeding problems) rather than checking coagulation studies to determine who is safe to tap.13

References

Lindsay et al. “Paracentesis-Induced Circulatory Dysfunction- A Primer for the Interventional Radiologist.” Semin Intervent Radiol 2014; 31: 276-278.
Runyon, B. “Management of Adult Patients with Ascites Due to Cirrhosis: Update 2012.” Hepatology Apr 2013.
European Assoc for the Study of the Liver. “EASL Clinical Practice Guidelines on the Mgmt of Ascites, SBP and Hepatorenal Syndrome in Cirrhosis.” J of Hepatolog 2010. V53: 397-417.
Hsu et al. “Management of Ascites in Patients with Liver cirrhosis: Recent Evidence and Controversies.” J of the Chinese Med Assoc. 76(2013) 123-130.
Cardenas and Gines. “Is Albumin Infusion Necessary After Large-Volume Paracentesis?” Liver International (2009).
Garcia-Comean et al. “Total Therapeutic Paracentesis (TTP) with and without intravenous albumin in the treatment of cirrhotic tense ascites: a randomized controlled trial.” Liver 1993: 13.
Bernardi et al. “Albumin Infusion in Patients Undergoing Large-Volume Paracentesis: A meta-analysis of randomized trials.” Hepatology. V55, Is4. April 2012.
Peltekian et al. “Cardiovascular, Renal and Neurohumoral Responses to Single Large-Volume Paracentesis in Patients with Cirrhosis and Diuretic-Resistant Ascites.” Am J Gastrenterology. March 1997; 92(3).
Tripodi et al. “Abnormalities of Hemostasis and Bleeding in Chronic Liver Disease.” Intern Emerg Med (2010) 5:7-12.
Caldwell et al. “Coagulation Disorders and Hemostasis in Liver Disease: Pathophysiology and critical assessment of current management.”
Mannucci,P. “Abnormal Hemostasis Tests and Bleeding in chronic Liver Disease: Are they related? No.” J of Thrombosis and Haemostasis. 4. 2006.
Runyon, B. “Paracentesis of ascitic fluid: a safe procedure.” Arch Intern Med. Nov 1986. 146.
Webster et al. “Hemorrhagic Complications of Large Volume Abdominal Paracentesis.” Am J of Gastroenterology. Vol 91, No 2. 1996.
Lin et al. “Should Bleeding Tendency Deter Abdominal Paracentesis?” Digestive and Liver Disease 37 (2005).
Grabau et al. “Performance Standards for Therapeutic Abdominal Paracentesis.” Hepatology. V 40, No2. 2004
Bilodeau, P&M. “Severe Haemorrhage Following Abdominal Paracentesis for Ascites in Patients with Liver Disease.” Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2005; 21: 525-529.
Gines, P et al. “Randomized comparative study of therapeutic paracentesis with and without intravenous albumin in cirrhosis.” Gastroenterology. 1988. 94:1493-1502.
Gines, P et al. “Randomized trial comparing albumin, dextran 70, and polygeline in cirrhotic patients with ascites treated by paracentesis.” Gastroenterology. Oct 1996. 111(4): 1002-1010.
Kwok, C et al. “Albumin reduces paracentesis-induced circulatory dysfunction and reduces death and renal impairment among patients with cirrhosis and infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis.” BioMed Res Int. 2013: 295153.
1 Comment
http://edit-ing.services/ link
8/22/2016 10:37:22 pm

A friend of mine is doctor, I will share this article with her to read and get new information.

Reply



Leave a Reply.

    Las Vegas EM 
    FOAM Blog

    A FREE AND OPEN-ACCESS MEDICAL EDUCATION BLOG BY THE RESIDENTS AND FACULTY OF  LasVegasEM. 

    The information contained in this blog is for educational puposes only and is not intended to advocate specific medical practices. All opinions are our own and do not imply endorsement by our hospital or school of medicine. Any reference to patients has been redacted or intentionally altered to make identification impossible. 

    READ FULL LEGAL DISCLAIMERS

    Picture
    Free LVEM Lecture Videos

    Archives

    November 2018
    June 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013

    Categories

    All
    #FOAMed
    #vegasfoamblog

    RSS Feed

CONTACT US


UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA LAS VEGAS
DEPT. OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE
901 RANCHO LANE, STE 135
LAS VEGAS, NV 89106


PH:      702.383.7885
FAX:   702.366.8545


EMERGENCYMEDICINELV@GMAIL.COM


Picture

QUICK LINKS


RESIDENCY

DEPARTMENT
FACULTY
RESIDENTS
STUDENTS

F.O.A.M.
INTRANET


WWW.LASVEGASEMR.COM


LasVegasEMR.com is neither owned nor operated by the University of Nevada School of Medicine (UNSOM). It is financed and managed independently by a group of emergency physicians. This website is not supported financially, technically, or otherwise by UNSOM nor by any other governmental entity. The affiliation with UNSOM and the UNSOM logo does not imply endorsement or approval of the content contained on these pages.
©LasVegasEMR physicians READ FULL LEGAL DISCLAIMERS
Design by DivTag Weebly Templates
Proudly powered by Weebly