Two rehydration protocols currently exist to treat diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) in pediatric patients aged <21 years: the traditional “one-bag” system and the more recent “two-bag” system. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the newer two-bag system versus the well-established one-bag system. The CiNAHL, Cochrane Library, Embase, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were comprehensively searched from inception to June 2023 by 2 independent reviewers using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis framework. Eligible studies were those that reported participants <21 years of age who presented to the emergency room with a clinical diagnosis of DKA. This review was prospectively registered on PROSPERO (CRD42023427551). From the initial screening of 42 studies, 8 unique studies encompassing 583 patients met the eligibility criteria. The analysis yielded no significant intergroup differences in hypoglycemia (odds ratio, 0.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.20–1.87; I2=3%) or mean glucose correction rate (mean difference [MD], 0.04 mg/ dL/hr; 95% CI, -13.10 to 13.17; I2=64%). The incidence of cerebral edema was as low (0.17%) across groups, with only one case reported in the one-bag group. Notably, the mean time to DKA resolution (MD, -3.24 h; 95% CI, -5.57 to -0.91; I2=0%) and mean response time for intravenous fluid changes (MD, -32.75 min; 95% CI, -43.21 to -22.29; I2=59%) was lower for the two-bag system. This meta- analysis presents preliminary evidence suggesting that the two-bag system may confer advantages over the one-bag system for selected patients. However, further studies with greater patient stratification based on DKA severity, fluid composition, and protocol are needed to draw definitive conclusions and elucidate the extent of these advantages.

Two rehydration protocols currently exist to treat diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) in pediatric patients aged <21 years: the traditional “one-bag” system and the more recent “two-bag” system. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the newer two-bag system versus the well-established one-bag system. The CiNAHL, Cochrane Library, Embase, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were comprehensively searched from inception to June 2023 by 2 independent reviewers using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis framework. Eligible studies were those that reported participants <21 years of age who presented to the emergency room with a clinical diagnosis of DKA. This review was prospectively registered on PROSPERO (CRD42023427551). From the initial screening of 42 studies, 8 unique studies encompassing 583 patients met the eligibility criteria. The analysis yielded no significant intergroup differences in hypoglycemia (odds ratio, 0.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.20–1.87; I2=3%) or mean glucose correction rate (mean difference [MD], 0.04 mg/ dL/hr; 95% CI, -13.10 to 13.17; I2=64%). The incidence of cerebral edema was as low (0.17%) across groups, with only one case reported in the one-bag group. Notably, the mean time to DKA resolution (MD, -3.24 h; 95% CI, -5.57 to -0.91; I2=0%) and mean response time for intravenous fluid changes (MD, -32.75 min; 95% CI, -43.21 to -22.29; I2=59%) was lower for the two-bag system. This meta- analysis presents preliminary evidence suggesting that the two-bag system may confer advantages over the one-bag system for selected patients. However, further studies with greater patient stratification based on DKA severity, fluid composition, and protocol are needed to draw definitive conclusions and elucidate the extent of these advantages.

Two rehydration protocols currently exist to treat diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) in pediatric patients aged <21 years: the traditional “one-bag” system and the more recent “two-bag” system. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the newer two-bag system versus the well-established one-bag system. The CiNAHL, Cochrane Library, Embase, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were comprehensively searched from inception to June 2023 by 2 independent reviewers using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis framework. Eligible studies were those that reported participants <21 years of age who presented to the emergency room with a clinical diagnosis of DKA. This review was prospectively registered on PROSPERO (CRD42023427551). From the initial screening of 42 studies, 8 unique studies encompassing 583 patients met the eligibility criteria. The analysis yielded no significant intergroup differences in hypoglycemia (odds ratio, 0.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.20–1.87; I2=3%) or mean glucose correction rate (mean difference [MD], 0.04 mg/ dL/hr; 95% CI, -13.10 to 13.17; I2=64%). The incidence of cerebral edema was as low (0.17%) across groups, with only one case reported in the one-bag group. Notably, the mean time to DKA resolution (MD, -3.24 h; 95% CI, -5.57 to -0.91; I2=0%) and mean response time for intravenous fluid changes (MD, -32.75 min; 95% CI, -43.21 to -22.29; I2=59%) was lower for the two-bag system. This meta- analysis presents preliminary evidence suggesting that the two-bag system may confer advantages over the one-bag system for selected patients. However, further studies with greater patient stratification based on DKA severity, fluid composition, and protocol are needed to draw definitive conclusions and elucidate the extent of these advantages.

Two rehydration protocols currently exist to treat diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) in pediatric patients aged <21 years: the traditional “one-bag” system and the more recent “two-bag” system. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the newer two-bag system versus the well-established one-bag system. The CiNAHL, Cochrane Library, Embase, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were comprehensively searched from inception to June 2023 by 2 independent reviewers using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis framework. Eligible studies were those that reported participants <21 years of age who presented to the emergency room with a clinical diagnosis of DKA. This review was prospectively registered on PROSPERO (CRD42023427551). From the initial screening of 42 studies, 8 unique studies encompassing 583 patients met the eligibility criteria. The analysis yielded no significant intergroup differences in hypoglycemia (odds ratio, 0.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.20–1.87; I2=3%) or mean glucose correction rate (mean difference [MD], 0.04 mg/ dL/hr; 95% CI, -13.10 to 13.17; I2=64%). The incidence of cerebral edema was as low (0.17%) across groups, with only one case reported in the one-bag group. Notably, the mean time to DKA resolution (MD, -3.24 h; 95% CI, -5.57 to -0.91; I2=0%) and mean response time for intravenous fluid changes (MD, -32.75 min; 95% CI, -43.21 to -22.29; I2=59%) was lower for the two-bag system. This meta- analysis presents preliminary evidence suggesting that the two-bag system may confer advantages over the one-bag system for selected patients. However, further studies with greater patient stratification based on DKA severity, fluid composition, and protocol are needed to draw definitive conclusions and elucidate the extent of these advantages.

Objective: To determine the utility of a highly sensitive troponin assay when utilized in the emergency department. Methods The FAST-TRAC study prospectively enrolled >1,500 emergency department patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome within 6 hours of symptom onset and 2 hours of emergency department presentation. It has several unique features that are not found in the majority of studies evaluating troponin. These include a very early presenting population in whom prospective data collection of risk score parameters and the physician’s clinical impression of the probability of acute coronary syndrome before any troponin data were available. Furthermore, two gold standard diagnostic definitions were determined by a pair of cardiologists reviewing two separate data sets; one that included all local troponin testing results and a second that excluded troponin testing so that diagnosis was based solely on clinical grounds. By this method, a statistically valid head-to-head comparison of contemporary and high sensitivity troponin testing is obtainable. Finally, because of a significant delay in sample processing, a unique ability to define the molecular stability of various troponin assays is possible.Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT00880802