The acronym CALL TO ECLS has been proposed as a potential tool to support decision-making in critical communication moments when qualifying a patient for the ECPR procedure. The aim of this study is to assess the accuracy of the acronym and validate its content. Validation is crucial to ensure that the acronym is theoretically correct and includes the necessary information that must be conveyed by EMS during the qualification of a patient with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest for ECMO. A survey was conducted using the LimeSurvey platform through the Survey Research System of the Jagiellonian University Medical College over a 6-month period (from December 2022 to May 2023). Usefulness, importance, clarity, and unambiguity were rated on a 4-point Likert scale, from 1 (not useful, not important, unclear, ambiguous) to 4 (useful, important, clear, unambiguous). On the 4-point scale, the Content Validity Index (I-CVI) was calculated as the percentage of subject matter experts who rated the criterion as having a level of importance/clarity/validity/uniqueness of 3 or 4. The Scale-level Content Validity Index (S-CVI) based on the average method was computed as the average of I-CVI scores (S-CVI-AVE) for all considered criteria (protocol). The number of fully completed surveys by experts was 35, and partial completion was obtained in 63 cases. All criteria were deemed significant/useful, with I-CVI coefficients ranging from 0.87 to 0.97. Similarly, the importance of all criteria was confirmed, as all I-CVI coefficients were greater than 0.78 (ranging from 0.83 to 0.97). The average I-CVI score for the ten considered criteria in terms of usefulness/significance and importance exceeded 0.9, indicating high validity of the tool/protocol/acronym. Based on the survey results and analysis of responses provided by experts, a second version was created, incorporating additional explanations. In Criterion 10, an explanation was added—“Signs of life”—during conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ROSC, motor response during CPR). It has been shown that the acronym CALL TO ECLS, according to experts, is accurate and contains the necessary content, and can serve as a system to facilitate communication between the pre-hospital environment and specialized units responsible for qualifying patients for the ECPR.

Background: The quadratus lumborum block (QLB) and erector spinae plane (ESP) block are relatively new regional analgesic techniques that provide analgesia to the abdominal wall and reduce postoperative opioid consumption. We compared the effectiveness of ultrasound‐guided bilateral ESP block versus bilateral QLB in patients undergoing laparoscopic kidney surgery. Methods: Adult patients who underwent laparoscopic nephrectomy or nephron‐sparing surgery (NSS) within the study period were included. Patients were randomly assigned to one of two groups: group I received an ultrasound‐guided ESP block with 30 mL of 0.35% ropivacaine on each side and group II received an ultrasound‐guided QLB 1 with 30 mL of 0.35% ropivacaine on each side. Results: A total of 84 patients were included, with 45 patients in the ESP block group and 39 in the QLB group. The mean dosage of oxycodone in the ESP block group was 22.66 mg and in the QLB group was 22.66 mg. There was no difference in oxycodone consumption within the first 24 h after surgery between the groups ( p = 0.77). Conclusion: The effect of ultrasound‐guided bilateral QLB and ESP blocks in patients undergoing laparoscopic kidney surgery was found to be similar in terms of postoperative pain and opioid consumption. There were no significant differences between the blocks in opioid consumption or pain scores. Both techniques appear to be effective and safe components of multimodal analgesia strategy for laparoscopic nephrectomy. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05446727

Background: Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) is predominantly performed in high-volume centres with extensive experience, which may limit its adoption by new facilities. However, data from the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization registry indicate that ECPR is often performed in small-volume centres, suggesting potential for its successful implementation. The aim of the study was to assess the first-year periprocedural results and patient outcomes after launching an ECPR programme in a newly established referral centre. Methods: Data from 22 consecutive patients (median age 44.5 years, 77.3% male) who underwent ECPR for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest between May 2023 and May 2024 were retrospectively analysed. The most frequent aetiologies were acute myocardial infarction (31.8%) and pulmonary embolism (22.7%). Periprocedural characteristics, complications, and survival and neurological outcomes at 3 months were assessed. Results: The median cannulation time was 15.5 minutes (IQR: 15.0–20.0) and median time from cardiac arrest to extracorporeal membrane oxygenation flow was 59.5 minutes (IQR: 40.0–78.8). At 3-month follow-up, the survival rate reached 31.8% (7 patients), and a favourable neurological outcome (a score of 1 or 2 on the Cerebral Performance Category Scale) occurred in 27.3% of the study group (6 patients). The cannulation success rate was 100%. In one case, cannulation was complicated by a perforation of the right femoral artery, necessitating endovascular repair. Conclusions: The preliminary results from the first year of our ECPR programme indicate that initiation of such an advanced resuscitative strategy in a newly established centre is achievable, with acceptable short-term clinical and neurological outcomes.

Background Totally implantable venous access ports (TIVAPs) are widely used in oncologic patients requiring long-term vascular access. However, the impact of skin incision orientation on postprocedural pain, procedural efficiency, and early complications remains unclear. This study compared transverse and longitudinal incisions in terms of early postoperative pain, patient-reported discomfort, procedure duration, and complication rates. Methods In this randomized, single-center study, 170 patients undergoing TIVAP implantation were assigned to either a transverse or longitudinal incision group (85 patients each). All procedures followed a standardized protocol with ultrasound-guided venous access and fluoroscopic confirmation of catheter tip position. Pain intensity was assessed using the numeric rating scale (NRS) within 24 h, and patient-reported discomfort was evaluated on day 7. Procedural characteristics and early complications were recorded. Results Postprocedural pain was low in both groups, with most patients reporting NRS scores between 0 and 2. Analgesic requirements were minimal, with no significant between-group differences. Discomfort at day 7 was also low and comparable. Procedure duration showed a trend toward shorter times in the transverse incision group [20 (18; 30) vs. 25 (20; 35) minutes; p = 0.09]. Overall complication rates were low, with no major complications. Minor complications included local inflammatory reactions and hematomas. Bleeding within the port pocket was more frequent in the longitudinal incision group, although not statistically significant. Conclusions Transverse and longitudinal incisions provide comparable outcomes in TIVAP implantation, with low pain, minimal discomfort, and low complication rates. A trend toward shorter procedure duration and less port pocket bleeding with transverse incisions suggests potential technical advantages. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT06766656 (Registered January 04, 2025).