Feasibility and Accuracy of an Ultrasound Algorithm for Acute Dyspnea Diagnosis in the Emergency Department (EMERALD-US)

March 4, 2022 updated by: CHOUIHED Tahar

Evaluation of the Feasibility and Accuracy of an Ultrasound Algorithm for Acute Dyspnea Diagnosis in the Emergency Department

The management of chest pain has revolutionized its prognosis, primarily by improving urgent diagnosis of myocardial infarction. Currently, acute dyspnea is twice as frequent as chest pain and its associated mortality is much higher (16% of acute dyspnea admitted to emergency departments (ED) ).

Inappropriate treatment of acute dyspnea in the ED is frequent (30%) and is associated with a tripling of intra-hospital mortality after adjustment for confounding factors (2.83, IC 1.48 to 5.41, p=0.002). Other elements have also highlighted the importance of a quick and appropriate acute dyspnea diagnosis:

  • The 2015 European Guidelines on acute heart failure emphasize the need for appropriate treatment within 90 minutes after the first medical contact.
  • Inadequate treatment of chronic bronchitis decompensation is associated with a doubling of intra-hospital mortality.
  • An initiation of antibiotic treatment within 4 hours of admission for pneumonia is recommended.
  • 30% of pulmonary embolisms are not diagnosed during the initial emergency department visit, whereas their mortality in the absence of treatment is 25%.

Lung, venous and (simplified) cardiac ultrasound is associated with improved diagnostic performance in ED. However, no ultrasound algorithm dedicated to emergency physicians has been formally validated. The Blue Protocol (Lichtenstein et al., Chest 2008) has been validated in intensive care patients with very different phenotypes than those admitted to the ED. Pivetta et al. (Chest 2015) proposed an algorithm focused solely for the diagnosis of heart failure, thus not providing a diagnosis for all the other causes of dyspnea in ED. Finally, Zanbonetti et al. (Chest 2017) proposed an "unguided" ultrasound use, notably integrating inferior vena cava evaluation. However, measuring the inferior vena cava is difficult at the start of ED management when patients are in acute respiratory distress.

Study Overview

Status

Recruiting

Conditions

Detailed Description

The investigators aim to assess the feasibility and accuracy of a new pragmatic and original ultrasound algorithm adapted for acute dyspnea diagnosis in the emergency department.

This primary objective of this prospective multicenter study is to assess the diagnostic accuracy of an ultrasound algorithm (EMERALD-US) dedicated to emergencies using lung, cardiac and vascular ultrasound for the 3 main dyspnea causes (heart failure, pneumonia and obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbation) in patients with acute non-traumatic dyspnea managed in the emergency department. Ultrasound exams will be blindly read by a centralized core laboratory after the standardized acquisition of all exams by a physician not involved in the care of patients in the ED. The main discharge diagnosis from initial hospitalization (heart failure, pneumonia and obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbation) will be adjudicated by a college of 3 senior physicians (emergency physician, cardiologist and internist) blinded to the use of ultrasound in the ED.

The secondary objectives of the study are to:

A/ Assess the feasibility of the ultrasound algorithm (EMERALD-US) in emergency departments.

B/ Assess the association between the diagnosis obtained from the ultrasound algorithm (EMERALD-US) and the results of additional (laboratory and radiological exams.

C/ Assess the diagnostic accuracy of the ultrasound algorithm (EMERALD-US) for less frequent dyspnea causes (pulmonary embolism, pleural effusion).

D/ Assess, the diagnostic accuracy of clinical (including BREST and PREDICA score), laboratory and radiological variables.

E/ Assess, the improvement in diagnosis accuracy with the ultrasound algorithm (EMERALD-US) on top of the diagnostic accuracy of clinical, laboratory and radiological exams.

F/ Assess the association between misdiagnosis (without using ultrasound) and survival at D30.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Anticipated)

225

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Contact

Study Contact Backup

Study Locations

      • Châlons-en-Champagne, France, 51000
        • Recruiting
        • Ch de Chalons En Champagne
        • Contact:
          • Alice PENINE, MD
        • Principal Investigator:
          • Alice PENINE, MD
      • Nancy, France, 54500
        • Recruiting
        • CHRU Nancy
        • Contact:
          • Tahar CHOUIHED, MD
      • Paris, France
        • Recruiting
        • AP-HP - Hôpital Cochin
        • Contact:
          • Jérôme BOKOBZA, MD
      • Paris, France
        • Recruiting
        • AP-HP - Hôpital Lariboisière
        • Contact:
          • Anthony CHAUVIN, MD
      • Sarreguemines, France, 57200
        • Recruiting
        • CH de Sarreguemines
        • Contact:
          • Emmanuelle SERIS, MD
        • Principal Investigator:
          • Emmanuelle SERIS, MD
      • Strasbourg, France
        • Recruiting
        • CHRU de Strasbourg, Hôpital de Hautepierre
        • Contact:
          • Pierrick Le Borgne, Dr
        • Principal Investigator:
          • Pierrick Le Borgne, Dr

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

50 years and older (ADULT, OLDER_ADULT)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Men and women ≥ 50 years old
  • Patients with non-traumatic acute dyspnea managed in the emergency department
  • Patients affiliated with a social security system

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Patients in cardiac arrest
  • Patients in persistent shock
  • Patients with impaired consciousness (Glasgow Score<9)
  • Patients with a history of thoracic surgery or pulmonary fibrosis
  • Dementia
  • Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome with ST elevation
  • Known current pregnancy
  • Patients under guardianship, trusteeship or legal protection

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: DIAGNOSTIC
  • Allocation: NA
  • Interventional Model: SINGLE_GROUP
  • Masking: NONE

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
OTHER: Acute non-traumatic dyspnea patients
Patients with acute non-traumatic dyspnea managed in the emergency department to assess the diagnostic accuracy of an ultrasound algorithm (EMERALD-US) dedicated to emergencies using lung, cardiac and vascular ultrasound for the 3 main dyspnea causes (heart failure, pneumonia and obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbation)
Ultrasound algorithm EMERALD-US is an dedicated to emergencies using lung, cardiac and vascular ultrasound for the 3 main dyspnea causes (heart failure, pneumonia and obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbation) in patients with acute non-traumatic dyspnea managed in the emergency department. The ultrasounds will be performed within first hour after first medical contact in emergency department by another emergency physician not in charge of the patient. The ultrasound results will be not shared with the emergency physician in charge of the patient.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Main discharge diagnosis (heart failure, pneumonia and obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbation)
Time Frame: an average of 2 weeks (from date of admission in the emergency department until the date of hospitalization discharge)
Main discharge diagnosis (heart failure, pneumonia and obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbation) adjudicated by a college of 3 senior physicians (emergency physician, cardiologist and internist) blinded to the use of ultrasound in the emergency department
an average of 2 weeks (from date of admission in the emergency department until the date of hospitalization discharge)

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Duration of the ultrasound examination
Time Frame: up to 30 minutes
Duration of the ultrasound examination is defined by the delay between the first and last contact between the ultrasound probe and the patient
up to 30 minutes
Proportion of complete realization of the ultrasound algorithm
Time Frame: up to 30 minutes
Proportion of complete realization of the ultrasound algorithm through study completion
up to 30 minutes
Diagnosis given by the algorithm after core-lab reading of the blinded ultrasound compared to the diagnosis provided by the emergency physician based on the EMERALD algorithm in the emergency department
Time Frame: At baseline
Diagnosis given by the algorithm after core-lab reading of the blinded ultrasound compared to the diagnosis provided by the emergency physician based on the EMERALD algorithm in the emergency department
At baseline
Patient management time in the emergency department
Time Frame: An average of 24 hours (Time between the time of entry to the emergency department and the time of discharge).
Patient management time in the emergency department is defined by the time between the time of entry to the emergency department and the time of discharge specified in the patient's medical report.
An average of 24 hours (Time between the time of entry to the emergency department and the time of discharge).
Brain Natriuretic Peptide (BNP) or N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide concentration
Time Frame: At admission in the emergency department
Assess the association between the diagnosis obtained from the ultrasound algorithm (EMERALD-US) and the results of additional laboratory exams. NT pro BNP will be measured from the biobanking.
At admission in the emergency department
C Reactive protein and procalcitonin concentration,
Time Frame: At admission in the emergency department
Assess the association between the diagnosis obtained from the ultrasound algorithm (EMERALD-US) and the results of additional local laboratory exams
At admission in the emergency department
D-dimer concentration,
Time Frame: At admission in the emergency department
Assess the association between the diagnosis obtained from the ultrasound algorithm (EMERALD-US) and the results of additional local laboratory exams
At admission in the emergency department
Radiological diagnosis (chest X-ray or chest CT).
Time Frame: At admission in the emergency department
Assess the association between the diagnosis obtained from the ultrasound algorithm (EMERALD-US) and the results of additional local radiological exams
At admission in the emergency department
Main discharge diagnosis including combined diagnosis (e.g. heart failure and pneumonia) from initial hospitalization adjudicated by a college of 3 senior physicians
Time Frame: An average of 2 weeks (from date of admission in the emergency department until the date of discharge)
Main discharge diagnosis including combined diagnosis (e.g. heart failure and pneumonia) from initial hospitalization adjudicated by a college of 3 senior physicians
An average of 2 weeks (from date of admission in the emergency department until the date of discharge)
All-cause mortality at D30.
Time Frame: At Day 30
Assess the association between misdiagnosis (without using ultrasound) and survival at D30
At Day 30

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Tahar CHOUIHED, MD, Central Hospital, CHRU de Nancy, France
  • Study Chair: Nicolas GIRERD, MD PhD, CHRU de Nancy, France
  • Study Chair: Patrick ROSSIGNOL, MD PhD, CHRU de Nancy, France

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (ACTUAL)

December 14, 2020

Primary Completion (ANTICIPATED)

March 14, 2024

Study Completion (ANTICIPATED)

April 14, 2024

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

September 20, 2018

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

September 28, 2018

First Posted (ACTUAL)

October 2, 2018

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (ACTUAL)

March 7, 2022

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

March 4, 2022

Last Verified

March 1, 2022

More Information

Terms related to this study

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Dyspnea

Clinical Trials on Ultrasound algorithm (EMERALD-US)

3
Subscribe