Comparison of Mechanical Insufflation-Exsufflation and Hypertonic Saline and Hyaluronic Acid With Conventional Open Catheter Suctioning in Intubated Patients.

BACKGROUND: Open respiratory secretion suctioning with a catheter causes pain and tracheobronchial mucosal injury in intubated patients. The goal of mechanical insufflation-exsufflation (MI-E) is to move secretions proximally and noninvasively by generating a high peak expiratory air flow. Nebulized hypertonic saline with hyaluronic acid (HS-HA) may facilitate suctioning by hydration. We assessed the safety and tolerance of a single session of airway clearance with MI-E and HS-HA in critically ill intubated patients. METHODS: Adults with a cuffed artificial airway were randomized to (1) open suctioning, (2) open suctioning after HS-HA, (3) MI-E, or (4) MI-E with HS-HA. Adverse events, pain and sedation/agitation scores, and respiratory and hemodynamic variables were collected before, during, and 5-min and 60-min post intervention. RESULTS: One-hundred twenty subjects were enrolled and completed the study. Median (interquartile range [IQR]) Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) score was 22 (16-28); median (IQR) age was 69.0 (57.0-75.7) y, and 90 (75%) were male. Baseline respiratory and hemodynamic variables were comparable. Adverse events occurred in 30 subjects (25%), with no between-group differences. Behavioral pain equivalents and Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale were higher during suctioning in groups 1 (P < .001) and 2 (P < .001). Independent predictive variables for higher pain and agitation/sedation scores were study groups 1 and 2 and simultaneous analgosedation, respectively. Noradrenaline infusion rates were lower at 60 min in groups 2 and 4. PaO2 /FIO2 had decreased at 5 min after open suctioning in group 1 and increased at 60 min in group 3. CONCLUSIONS: We observed no difference in adverse events. MI-E avoids pain and agitation.

Hourly Analysis of Mechanical Ventilation Parameters in Critically Ill Adult Covid-19 Patients: Association with Mortality.

Objective: There exists controversy about the pathophysiology and lung mechanics of COVID-19 associated acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), because some report severe hypoxemia with preserved respiratory system mechanics, contrasting with "classic" ARDS. We performed a detailed hourly analysis of the characteristics and time course of lung mechanics and biochemical analysis of patients requiring invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) for COVID-19-associated ARDS, comparing survivors and non-survivors. Methods: Retrospective analysis of the data stored in the ICU information system of patients admitted in our hospital ICU that required IMV due to confirmed SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia between March 5th and April 30th, 2020. We compare respiratory system mechanics and gas exchange during the first ten days of IMV, discriminating volume and pressure controlled modes, between ICU survivors and non-survivors. Results: 140 patients were included, analyzing 11 138 respiratory mechanics recordings. Global mortality was 38.6%. Multivariate analysis showed that age (OR 1.092, 95% (CI 1.014-1.176)) and need of renal replacement therapies (OR 10.15, (95% CI 1.58-65.11)) were associated with higher mortality. Previous use of Angiotensin Converting Enzyme inhibitor (ACEI)/angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARBs) also seemed to show an increased mortality (OR 4.612, (95% CI 1.19-17.84)) although this significance was lost when stratifying by age. Respiratory variables start to diverge significantly between survivors and non-survivors after the 96 to 120 hours (hs) from mechanical ventilation initiation, particularly respiratory system compliance. In non survivors, mechanical power at 24 and 96 hs was higher regardless ventilatory mode. Conclusions: In patients admitted for SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia and requiring mechanical ventilation, non survivors have different respiratory system mechanics than survivors in the first 10 days of ICU admission. We propose a checkpoint at 96-120 hs to assess patients improvement or worsening in order to consider escalating to extracorporeal therapies.

Big data and machine learning in critical care: Opportunities for collaborative research.

The introduction of clinical information systems (CIS) in Intensive Care Units (ICUs) offers the possibility of storing a huge amount of machine-ready clinical data that can be used to improve patient outcomes and the allocation of resources, as well as suggest topics for randomized clinical trials. Clinicians, however, usually lack the necessary training for the analysis of large databases. In addition, there are issues referred to patient privacy and consent, and data quality. Multidisciplinary collaboration among clinicians, data engineers, machine-learning experts, statisticians, epidemiologists and other information scientists may overcome these problems. A multidisciplinary event (Critical Care Datathon) was held in Madrid (Spain) from 1 to 3 December 2017. Under the auspices of the Spanish Critical Care Society (SEMICYUC), the event was organized by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Critical Data Group (Cambridge, MA, USA), the Innovation Unit and Critical Care Department of San Carlos Clinic Hospital, and the Life Supporting Technologies group of Madrid Polytechnic University. After presentations referred to big data in the critical care environment, clinicians, data scientists and other health data science enthusiasts and lawyers worked in collaboration using an anonymized database (MIMIC III). Eight groups were formed to answer different clinical research questions elaborated prior to the meeting. The event produced analyses for the questions posed and outlined several future clinical research opportunities. Foundations were laid to enable future use of ICU databases in Spain, and a timeline was established for future meetings, as an example of how big data analysis tools have tremendous potential in our field.

Preliminary experience on the safety and tolerability of mechanical "insufflation-exsufflation" in subjects with artificial airway.

BACKGROUND: Catheter suctioning of respiratory secretions in intubated subjects is limited to the proximal airway and associated with traumatic lesions to the mucosa and poor tolerance. "Mechanical insufflation-exsufflation" exerts positive pressure, followed by an abrupt drop to negative pressure. Potential advantages of this technique are aspiration of distal airway secretions, avoiding trauma, and improving tolerance. METHODS: We applied insufflation of 50 cmH2O for 3 s and exsufflation of - 45 cmH2O for 4 s in patients with an endotracheal tube or tracheostomy cannula requiring secretion suctioning. Cycles of 10 to 12 insufflations-exsufflations were performed and repeated if secretions were aspirated and visible in the proximal artificial airway. Clinical and laboratory parameters were collected before and 5 and 60 min after the procedure. Subjects were followed during their ICU stay until discharge or death. RESULTS: Mechanical insufflation-exsufflation was applied 26 times to 7 male and 6 female subjects requiring suctioning. Mean age was 62.6 ± 20 years and mean Apache II score 23.3 ± 7.4 points. At each session, a median of 2 (IQR 1; 2) cycles on median day of intubation 11.5 (IQR 6.25; 25.75) were performed. Mean insufflation tidal volume was 1043.6 ± 649.9 ml. No statistically significant differences were identified between baseline and post-procedure time points. Barotrauma, desaturation, atelectasis, hemoptysis, or other airway complication and hemodynamic complications were not detected. All, except one, of the mechanical insufflation-exsufflation sessions were productive, showing secretions in the proximal artificial airway, and were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Our preliminary data suggest that mechanical insufflation-exsufflation may be safe and effective in patients with artificial airway. Safety and efficacy need to be confirmed in larger studies with different patient populations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT 2017-005201-13 (EU Clinical Trials Register).

[Cost per episode of care in the surgical treatment of skin cancer]. / Coste por proceso en el tratamiento quirúrgico del cáncer de piel.

BACKGROUND: Skin cancer is the most common form of malignancy in humans. It can be treated with various techniques and by different specialists. The procedure with the lowest failure rates is surgical excision. OBJECTIVES: To calculate the cost per episode of care in the surgical treatment of non-melanoma skin cancer (NMSC) when performed by dermatologists. MATERIAL AND METHOD: An episode of NMSC surgical care was defined as the series of healthcare services required for a dermatologist to treat skin cancer. The cost per episode was calculated using the economic data made available by the public health institution in which the analysis was performed. RESULTS: The cost per episode of care varied between 273.71 and 1,129.84 euro, depending on the surgical procedure performed and the related health services required. CONCLUSIONS: Skin cancer is one of the cutaneous diseases with clinical manifestations that are easily recognized by dermatologists, who frequently do not even need histological confirmation to make the diagnosis and choose the therapeutic approach. Consequently, dermatological surgeons are highly efficient, since the episode of care is performed with a minimum of healthcare services and only in appropriately selected individuals. The cost of treatment varies substantially, depending on the complexity of the surgical procedures and the site where they are performed.