Cardiogenic shock diagnosis and management in general intensive care: a nationwide survey.

BACKGROUND: the epidemiology of cardiogenic shock has evolved over the years: in the last decades an increasing prevalence of cardiogenic shock related to acute decompensated heart failure was observed. Therefore, treatment bundles should be updated according to the underlying pathophysiology. No data exist regarding the diagnostic/therapeutic strategies in general intensive care units. METHODS: A 27-questions survey was spread through the GiViTi (Italian Group for the Evaluation of Interventions in Intensive Care Medicine). The results were then divided according to level of hospitals (1st-2nd versus 3rd). RESULTS: Sixty-nine general intensive care units replied to the survey. The shock team is present in 13% of institutions; Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions shock classification is applied only in 18.8%. Among the ICUs, 94.2% routinely use a cardiac output monitoring device (pulmonary artery catheter more frequently in 3rd level centers). The first-line adrenergic drug are vasopressors in 27.5%, inotrope in 21.7% or their combination in 50.7%; 79.7% applies fluid challenge. The first vasopressor of choice is norepinephrine (95.7%) (maximum dosage tolerated higher than 0.5 mcg/kg/min in 29%); the first line inotrope is dobutamine (52.2%), followed by epinephrine in 36.2%. The most frequently used mechanical circulatory supports are intra-aortic balloon pump (71%), Impella (34.8%) and VA-ECMO (33.3%); VA-ECMO is the first line strategy in refractory cardiogenic shock (60.8%). CONCLUSIONS: According to this survey, there is no standardized approach to cardiogenic shock amongst Italian general intensive care units. The application of shock severity stratification and the treatment bundles may play a key role in improving the outcome.

Effectiveness of a Multifaced Antibiotic Stewardship Program: A Pre-Post Study in Seven Italian ICUs.

Multidrug resistance has become a serious threat for health, particularly in hospital-acquired infections. To improve patients' safety and outcomes while maintaining the efficacy of antimicrobials, complex interventions are needed involving infection control and appropriate pharmacological treatments in antibiotic stewardship programs. We conducted a multicenter pre-post study to assess the impact of a stewardship program in seven Italian intensive care units (ICUs). Each ICU was visited by a multidisciplinary team involving clinicians, microbiologists, pharmacologists, infectious disease specialists, and data scientists. Interventions were targeted according to the characteristics of each unit. The effect of the program was measured with a panel of indicators computed with data from the MargheritaTre electronic health record. The median duration of empirical therapy decreased from 5.6 to 4.6 days and the use of quinolones dropped from 15.3% to 6%, both p < 0.001. The proportion of multi-drug-resistant bacteria (MDR) in ICU-acquired infections fell from 57.7% to 48.8%. ICU mortality and length of stay remained unchanged, indicating that reducing antibiotic administration did not harm patients' safety. This study shows that our stewardship program successfully improved the management of infections. This suggests that policy makers should tackle multidrug resistance with a multidisciplinary approach based on continuous monitoring and personalised interventions.

111In-Pentetreotide SPECT/CT in Pulmonary Carcinoid.

AIM: We evaluated somatostatin receptor scintigraphy (SRS) with (111)In-pentetreotide incremental value in pulmonary carcinoid (PC) diagnosis compared to contrast enhanced Computed Tomography (ceCT). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We enrolled 81 patients with ascertained PC, 39 at initial staging and 42 in follow-up; the primary tumor had already been excised in 68 cases. Single Photon emission Computed Tomography (SPECT) images were reconstructed with the iterative method and fused with non-enhanced Computed tomography (CT) images. RESULTS: Primary PC or metastatic lesions were ascertained in 55/81 patients and SPECT/CT was positive in 50/55 cases, while ceCT was positive in 44/55. Comparing SPECT/CT with ceCT results, we found a sensitivity of 96 vs. 87.5%, and specificity of 92% vs. 97% for the detection of primary lesion or recurrent disease. A total of 198 lesions were ascertained at SPECT/CT, while 161 at ceCT, with values of sensitivity and specificity of 85.5% and 84.6% for SRS and 75.2% and 90.5% respectively. CONCLUSION: (111)In-Pentetreotide SPECT/CT proved to be more sensitive and accurate than ceCT, thus enhancing its role in evaluating patients with PC.