Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background and Objectives: Hemolysis is reported to be present in up to 10% of blood gas specimens in the central lab; however, few data on the incidence of hemolysis using a point-of-care testing (POCT) blood gas analysis are available in the setting of the emergency department. The aims of this study were: (1) to analyze the prevalence of hemolysis in blood gas samples collected in the ED using a POCT device; and (2) to evaluate the impact of hemolysis on blood sample results and its clinical consequences. Materials and Methods: We collected 525 consecutive POCT arterial blood gas samples using syringes with electrolyte-balanced heparin within 3 different EDs in the metropolitan area of Rome. Immediately after the collection, the blood samples were checked for the presence of hemolysis with a POCT instrument (i.e., HEMCHECK, H-10 ®). The samples were then subsequently processed for blood gasses, and an electrolytes analysis by a second operator blinded for the hemolysis results. A venous blood sample was simultaneously collected, analyzed for it’s potassium value, and used as a reference. Results: Of the samples, 472 were considered for the statistics, while 53 were excluded due to the high percentage of hemolysis due to operator fault in carrying out the measurement. The final mean hemolysis per operator was 12% (±13% SD), and the total final hemolysis was 14.4%.Potassium (K+) was significantly higher in the hemolyzed group compared with the non-hemolyzed sample (4.60 ± 0.11 vs. 3.99 ± 0.03 mEq/L; p < 0.001), and there were differences between arterial potassium versus venous potassium (D(a-v) K+, 0.29 ± 0.06 vs.−0.19 ± 0.02 mEq/L, p < 0.01). A Bland–Altman analysis confirmed that hemolysis significantly overestimated blood potassium level. Conclusion: Almost 12% of POCT blood gas analysis samples performed in the ED could be hemolyzed, and the presence of this hemolysis is not routinely detected. This could cause an error in the interpretation of the results, leading to the consideration of potassium concentrations being below the lower limit within the normal limits and also leading to the diagnosis of false hyperkalemia, which would have potential clinical consequences in therapeutic decision-making in the ED. The routine use of a POCT hemolysis detector could help prevent any misdiagnoses.

Objective(s):To illustrate incidental 18F-FDG PET-CT findings and related CT alterations of suspicious pulmonary interstitial involvement in asymptomatic oncologic patients during the first COVID-19 outbreak in the core of Italian peak.Methods:We retrospectively evaluated the 18F-FDG PET-CT follow-up examinations performed during the first Italian COVID-19 outbreak (March 3rd-April 15th, 2020) in 10 asymptomatic oncologic patients with a highly suspicious interstitial pulmonary involvement on CT. Six cases were confirmed SARS-CoV-2 by molecular tests. The following parameters were assessed: 1) lung involvement on co-registration CT as extension (laterality, number of lobes), pattern (ground-glass opacities/GGO, consolidations, mixed) and stage (early, progressive, peak, and absorption); 2) the maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) of lung lesions on 18F-FDG PET.Results:The involved lobes were 5 in 5 cases (3 confirmed SARS-CoV-2), 2-4 in 4 cases and 1 in 1 case. GGO were found in all patients; 3 cases also showed a combination of GGO and peripheral consolidations (mixed). Five cases were suggestive for an early stage of interstitial pneumonia, 4 for progressive and 1 for peak. All the lung lesions showed increased FDG uptake. In early stages SUVmax ranged from 1.5 to 11, in progressive from 3.3 to 6.8, in peak from 2.4 to 7.7. SUVmax ranged 1.5-11 in patients with only GGO and 2.8-7.7 in those with mixed pattern.Conclusions: 18F-FDG PET-CT findings in suspected COVID-19 pulmonary involvement of asymptomatic oncologic patients showed an increase in FDG uptake of GGO and consolidations, but with a wide and apparently nonspecific range of SUVmax values.