(1) Introduction: Since electric scooters were launched in 2017, they have become increasingly popular worldwide and a cause of childhood trauma. (2) Case reports: This paper has a double-fold purpose: it reports two cases of epidural hematomas and compares them with electric scooter-related head trauma in the literature. An overview of the literature on this topic was performed to make such a comparison. Our cases are one of almost 52 cm³ and one of 129 cm^3, both in two eight-year-olds. (3) Discussion: Although usually mild, traumatic brain injuries following e-scooter falls can also be moderate and severe. Reduced helmet use, high speed, and a lack of experience are the perfect set-up for potential severe injuries. Intracranial bleeds are not frequent, and epidural hematomas are rare in such cases, but they can significantly impact the individual, community, and healthcare system. No other medium- or large-sized epidural hematomas were reported in children sustaining electric scooter-related head trauma. (4) Conclusions: Our review parallels the literature and our hospital’s experience. Although there are both similarities and discrepancies between our cases and the literature, mild trauma should not be disregarded, for it may hide serious complications requiring immediate surgery.

Background and Objective: New-onset atrial fibrillation (NOAF) is a common cardiac condition often observed in intensive care units. When amiodarone is used to treat this condition, either to maintain sinus rhythm after electrical cardioversion or to control heart rate, complications can arise when a systemic pathology is present. Systemic pathology can result in a decrease in cardiac output and blood pressure, making the management of NOAF and septic shock challenging. Limited international research exists on the coexistence of NOAF and septic shock, making it difficult to determine the optimal course of treatment. While amiodarone is not the primary choice of antiarrhythmic drug for patients in septic shock, it may be considered for those with underlying cardiac issues. This paper aims to investigate the safety of administering amiodarone to patients with septic shock and explore whether another antiarrhythmic drug may be more effective, especially considering the cardiac conditions that patients may have. Materials and Methods: To write this article, we searched electronic databases for studies where authors used amiodarone and other medications for heart rate control or sinus rhythm restoration. Results: The studies reviewed in this work have shown that for the patients with septic shock and NOAF along with a pre-existing cardiac condition like a dilated left atrium, the use of amiodarone may provide greater benefits compared to other antiarrhythmic drugs. For patients with NOAF and septic shock without underlying heart disease, the initial use of propafenone has been found to be advantageous. However, a challenge arises when deciding between rhythm or heart rate control using various drug classes. Unfortunately, there is limited literature available on this specific scenario. Conclusions: NOAF is a frequent and potentially life-threatening complication occurring in one out of seven patients with sepsis, and its incidence is rising among patients with septic shock.