The Relationship of Diaphragmatic Ultrasound-Based and Manometric Indices With Difficult Weaning in Tracheostomized Patients.

BACKGROUND: Patients with a tracheostomy and difficult weaning from invasive mechanical ventilation constitute a challenging problem in critical care. An increased duration of ventilation may lead to diaphragmatic dysfunction and a noninvasive assessment of the diaphragm, such as ultrasound, attracts interest in the clinical practice. We evaluated the relationship of ultrasound-derived indices with weaning outcome and with established indices of respiratory strength and load in subjects who are tracheostomized and undergoing weaning. METHODS: This prospective study was conducted at an academic ICU in Greece. Twenty subjects with tracheostomy and difficult weaning, during a spontaneous breathing trial, underwent time synchronous diaphragmatic sonography and esophageal manometry, to assess diaphragmatic excursion and thickening fraction, esophageal and transdiaphragmatic pressures, pressure-time product of the esophageal pressure, and maximum inspiratory pressure. The primary outcome was liberation from mechanical ventilation at 48 h. The relationship of diaphragmatic ultrasound with esophageal pressure-derived indices was also evaluated. RESULTS: Weaning from invasive ventilation failed in 10 subjects. Diaphragmatic excursion exhibited a significant difference between weaning success and failure (1.34 ± 0.56 versus 0.79 ± 0.44; P = .044), a strong correlation with transdiaphragmatic pressure (r = 0.7, P = .02), and a moderate correlation with the pressure-time product of the esophageal pressure (r = 0.65, P = .02) and the maximum inspiratory pressure (r = 0.66, P = .02). Transdiaphragmatic pressure presented the highest area under the curve (0.97). However, when transdiaphragmatic pressure was compared with diaphragmatic excursion (area under the curve, 0.84) for predictive accuracy, no significant difference was found. CONCLUSIONS: Diaphragmatic excursion is a valuable tool for the assessment of diaphragmatic strength, respiratory load, and weaning prediction.

The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Mental Health and Quality of Life in COVID-19 Department Healthcare Workers in Central Greece.

BACKGROUND: The pandemic crisis created conditions of insecurity and threat and brought about changes in social contacts and everyday life. Frontline healthcare workers (HCW) were mostly affected. We aimed to evaluate the quality of life and negative emotions in COVID-19 HCW and searched for factors influencing the above. METHODS: The present study was conducted among three different academic hospitals in central Greece (04/2020-03/2021). Demographics, attitude towards COVID-19, quality of life, depression, anxiety, stress (using the WHOQOL-BREF and DASS21 questionnaire) and the fear of COVID-19 were assessed. Factors affecting the reported quality of life were also assessed. RESULTS: The study involved 170 HCW in COVID-19 dedicated departments. Moderate levels of quality of life (62.4%), satisfaction with social relations (42.4%), working environment (55.9%) and mental health (59.4%) were reported. Stress was present in 30.6% of HCW; 20.6% reported fear for COVID-19, depression (10.6%) and anxiety (8.2%). HCW in the tertiary hospital were more satisfied with social relations and working environment and had less anxiety. Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) availability affected the quality of life, satisfaction in the work environment and the presence of anxiety and stress. Feeling safe during work influenced social relations and fear of COVID-19 Conclusion: The HCW quality of life is affected in the pandemic. Feelings of safety during work related to the reported quality of life.

Neuromuscular Blockade in the Pre- and COVID-19 ARDS Patients.

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) accounts for a quarter of mechanically ventilated patients, while during the pandemic, it overwhelmed the capacity of intensive care units (ICUs). Lung protective ventilation (low tidal volume, positive-end expiratory pressure titrated to lung mechanics and oxygenation, permissive hypercapnia) is a non-pharmacological approach that is the gold standard of management. Among the pharmacological treatments, the use of neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBAs), although extensively studied, has not yet been well clarified. The rationale is to minimize the risk for lung damage progression, in the already-injured pulmonary parenchyma. By abolishing rigorous spontaneous efforts, NMBAs may decrease the generation of high transpulmonary pressures that could aggravate patients' self-inflicted lung injury. Moreover, NMBAs can harmonize the patient-ventilator interaction. Recent randomized controlled trials reported contradictory results and changed the clinical practice in a bidirectional way. NMBAs have not been documented to improve long-term survival; thus, the current guidance suggests their use only in patients in whom a lung protective ventilation protocol cannot be applied, due to asynchrony or increased respiratory efforts. In the present review, we discuss the published data and additionally the clinical practice in the "war" conditions of the COVID-19 pandemic, concerning NMBA use in the management of patients with ARDS.

Physiologic effects of stress dose corticosteroids in in-hospital cardiac arrest (CORTICA): A randomized clinical trial.

Aim: Postresuscitation hemodynamics are associated with hospital mortality/functional outcome. We sought to determine whether low-dose steroids started during and continued after cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) affect postresuscitation hemodynamics and other physiological variables in vasopressor-requiring, in-hospital cardiac arrest. Methods: We conducted a two-center, randomized, double-blind trial of patients with adrenaline (epinephrine)-requiring cardiac arrest. Patients were randomized to receive either methylprednisolone 40 mg (steroids group) or normal saline-placebo (control group) during the first CPR cycle post-enrollment. Postresuscitation shock was treated with hydrocortisone 240 mg daily for 7 days maximum and gradual taper (steroids group), or saline-placebo (control group). Primary outcomes were arterial pressure and central-venous oxygen saturation (ScvO2) within 72 hours post-ROSC. Results: Eighty nine of 98 controls and 80 of 86 steroids group patients with ROSC were treated as randomized. Primary outcome data were collected from 100 patients with ROSC (control, n = 54; steroids, n = 46). In intention-to-treat mixed-model analyses, there was no significant effect of group on arterial pressure, marginal mean (95% confidence interval) for mean arterial pressure, steroids vs. control: 74 (68-80) vs. 72 (66-79) mmHg] and ScvO2 [71 (68-75)% vs. 69 (65-73)%], cardiac index [2.8 (2.5-3.1) vs. 2.9 (2.5-3.2) L/min/m2], and serum cytokine concentrations [e.g. interleukin-6, 89.1 (42.8-133.9) vs. 75.7 (52.1-152.3) pg/mL] determined within 72 hours post-ROSC (P = 0.12-0.86). There was no between-group difference in body temperature, echocardiographic variables, prefrontal blood flow index/cerebral autoregulation, organ failure-free days, and hazard for poor in-hospital/functional outcome, and adverse events (P = 0.08->0.99). Conclusions: Our results do not support the use of low-dose corticosteroids in in-hospital cardiac arrest.Trial Registration:ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT02790788 ( https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ).

Ceftazidime-Avibactam To Treat Life-Threatening Infections by Carbapenem-Resistant Pathogens in Critically Ill Mechanically Ventilated Patients.

Data on the effectiveness of ceftazidime-avibactam (CAZ-AVI) in critically ill, mechanically ventilated patients are limited. The present retrospective observational cohort study, which was conducted in two general intensive care units (ICUs) in central Greece, compared critically ill, mechanically ventilated patients suffering from carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) infections receiving CAZ-AVI to patients who received appropriate available antibiotic therapy. Clinical and microbiological outcomes and safety issues were evaluated. A secondary analysis in patients with bloodstream infections (BSIs) was conducted. Forty-one patients that received CAZ-AVI (the CAZ-AVI group) were compared to 36 patients that received antibiotics other than CAZ-AVI (the control group). There was a significant improvement in the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score on days 4 and 10 in the CAZ-AVI group compared to that in the control group (P = 0.006, and P = 0.003, respectively). Microbiological eradication was accomplished in 33/35 (94.3%) patients in the CAZ-AVI group and 21/31 (67.7%) patients in the control group (P = 0.021), and clinical cure was observed in 33/41 (80.5%) versus 19/36 (52.8%) patients (P = 0.010), respectively. The results were similar in the BSI subgroups for both outcomes (P = 0.038 and P = 0.014, respectively). The 28-day survival was 85.4% in the CAZ-AVI group and 61.1% in the control group (log-rank test = 0.035), while there were 2 and 12 relapses in the CAZ-AVI and control groups, respectively (P = 0.042). A CAZ-AVI-containing regime was an independent predictor of survival and clinical cure (odds ratio [OR] = 5.575 and P = 0.012 and OR = 5.125 and P = 0.004, respectively), as was illness severity. No significant side effects were recorded. In conclusion, a CAZ-AVI-containing regime was more effective than other available antibiotic agents for the treatment of CRE infections in the high-risk, mechanically ventilated ICU population evaluated.