Occasionally in science we encounter a truly bizarre result. Our natural inclination is to ignore the bizarre result. It’s jarring. It creates cognitive dissonance, challenging our understanding of the world. However, struggling to understand the bizarre result can reset our perspective. It’s often the bizarre, unexpected result that changes everything.
GI bleeding is bread and butter critical care. However, there are a lot of nuances – especially regarding variceal bleeding and new approaches to hematochezia.
How should we evaluate for myocardial ischemia in a critically ill patient admitted for some other problem (e.g. pneumonia)? What does it mean if their troponin is elevated?
The following rant focuses on sepsis research, but these principles are universal. I apologize for the agitated nature of this post, but I just can’t hold it in any longer. If I read one more correlational study which tries to imply causation, I might just explode. In order to prevent burnout, I’m going to journal these thoughts instead. So, hang on to your hats, because things are going to get a bit heated.