Contemporary management of aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage. An update for the intensivist.

Aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage (aSAH) is a rare yet profoundly debilitating condition associated with high global case fatality and morbidity rates. The key determinants of functional outcome include early brain injury, rebleeding of the ruptured aneurysm and delayed cerebral ischaemia. The only effective way to reduce the risk of rebleeding is to secure the ruptured aneurysm quickly. Prompt diagnosis, transfer to specialized centers, and meticulous management in the intensive care unit (ICU) significantly improved the prognosis of aSAH. Recently, multimodality monitoring with specific interventions to correct pathophysiological imbalances has been proposed. Vigilance extends beyond intracranial concerns to encompass systemic respiratory and haemodynamic monitoring, as derangements in these systems can precipitate secondary brain damage. Challenges persist in treating aSAH patients, exacerbated by a paucity of robust clinical evidence, with many interventions showing no benefit when tested in rigorous clinical trials. Given the growing body of literature in this field and the issuance of contemporary guidelines, our objective is to furnish an updated review of essential principles of ICU management for this patient population. Our review will discuss the epidemiology, initial stabilization, treatment strategies, long-term prognostic factors, the identification and management of post-aSAH complications. We aim to offer practical clinical guidance to intensivists, grounded in current evidence and expert clinical experience, while adhering to a concise format.

Design and implementation of community consultation for research conducted under exception from informed consent regulations for the PreVent and the PreVent 2 trials: Changes over time and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: Emergency clinical research has played an important role in improving outcomes for acutely ill patients. This is due in part to regulatory measures that allow Exception From Informed Consent (EFIC) trials. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) requires sponsor-investigators to engage in community consultation and public disclosure activities prior to initiating an Exception From Informed Consent trial. Various approaches to community consultation and public disclosure have been described and adapted to local contexts and Institutional Review Board (IRB) interpretations. The COVID-19 pandemic has precluded the ability to engage local communities through direct, in-person public venues, requiring research teams to find alternative ways to inform communities about emergency research. METHODS: The PreVent and PreVent 2 studies were two Exception From Informed Consent trials of emergency endotracheal intubation, conducted in one geographic location for the PreVent Study and in two geographic locations for the PreVent 2 Study. During the period of the two studies, there was a substantial shift in the methodological approach spanning across the periods before and after the pandemic from telephone, to in-person, to virtual settings. RESULTS: During the 10 years of implementation of Exception From Informed Consent activities for the two PreVent trials, there was overall favorable public support for the concept of Exception From Informed Consent trials and for the importance of emergency clinical research. Community concerns were few and also did not differ much by method of contact. Attendance was higher with the implementation of virtual technology to reach members of the community, and overall feedback was more positive compared with telephone contacts or in-person events. However, the proportion of survey responses received after completion of the remote, live event was substantially lower, with a greater proportion of respondents having higher education levels. This suggests less active engagement after completion of the synchronous activity and potentially higher selection bias among respondents. Importantly, we found that engagement with local community leaders was a key component to develop appropriate plans to connect with the public. CONCLUSION: The PreVent experience illustrated operational advantages and disadvantages to community consultation conducted primarily by telephone, in-person events, or online activities. Approaches to enhance community acceptance included partnering with community leaders to optimize the communication strategies and trust building with the involvement of Institutional Review Board representatives during community meetings. Researchers might need to pivot from in-person planning to virtual techniques while maintaining the ability to engage with the public with two-way communication approaches. Due to less active engagement, and potential for selection bias in the responders, further research is needed to address the costs and benefits of virtual community consultation and public disclosure activities compared to in-person events.

Early Beta-Blocker Utilization in Critically Ill Patients With Moderate-Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: There is limited evidence that beta-blockers may provide benefit for patients with moderate-severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) during the acute injury period. Larger studies on utilization patterns and impact on outcomes in clinical practice are lacking. OBJECTIVE: The present study uses a large, national hospital claims-based dataset to examine early beta-blocker utilization patterns and its association with clinical outcomes among critically ill patients with moderate-severe TBI. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of the administrative claims Premier Healthcare Database of adults (≥17 years) with moderate-severe TBI admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) from 2016 to 2020. The exposure was receipt of a beta-blocker during day 1 or 2 of ICU stay (BB+). The primary outcome was hospital mortality, and secondary outcomes were: hospital length of stay (LOS), ICU LOS, discharge to home, and vasopressor utilization. In a sensitivity analysis, we explored the association of beta-blocker class (cardioselective and noncardioselective) with hospital mortality. We used propensity weighting methods to address possible confounding by treatment indication. RESULTS: A total of 109 665 participants met inclusion criteria and 39% (n = 42 489) were exposed to beta-blockers during the first 2 days of hospitalization. Of those, 42% received cardioselective only, 43% received noncardioselective only, and 14% received both. After adjustment, there was no association with hospital mortality in the BB+ group compared to the BB- group (adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 0.99, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.94, 1.04). The BB+ group had longer hospital stays, lower chance of discharged home, and lower risk of vasopressor utilization, although these difference were clinically small. Beta-blocker class was not associated with hospital mortality. CONCLUSION: In this retrospective cohort study, we found variation in use of beta-blockers and early exposure was not associated with hospital mortality. Further research is necessary to understand the optimal type, dose, and timing of beta-blockers for this population.

Soft phenotyping for sepsis via EHR time-aware soft clustering.

OBJECTIVE: Sepsis is one of the most serious hospital conditions associated with high mortality. Sepsis is the result of a dysregulated immune response to infection that can lead to multiple organ dysfunction and death. Due to the wide variability in the causes of sepsis, clinical presentation, and the recovery trajectories, identifying sepsis sub-phenotypes is crucial to advance our understanding of sepsis characterization, to choose targeted treatments and optimal timing of interventions, and to improve prognostication. Prior studies have described different sub-phenotypes of sepsis using organ-specific characteristics. These studies applied clustering algorithms to electronic health records (EHRs) to identify disease sub-phenotypes. However, prior approaches did not capture temporal information and made uncertain assumptions about the relationships among the sub-phenotypes for clustering procedures. METHODS: We developed a time-aware soft clustering algorithm guided by clinical variables to identify sepsis sub-phenotypes using data available in the EHR. RESULTS: We identified six novel sepsis hybrid sub-phenotypes and evaluated them for medical plausibility. In addition, we built an early-warning sepsis prediction model using logistic regression. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that these novel sepsis hybrid sub-phenotypes are promising to provide more accurate information on sepsis-related organ dysfunction and sepsis recovery trajectories which can be important to inform management decisions and sepsis prognosis.

Association of Early Dexmedetomidine Utilization With Clinical Outcomes After Moderate-Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is an expensive and common public health problem. Management of TBI oftentimes includes sedation to facilitate mechanical ventilation (MV) for airway protection. Dexmedetomidine has emerged as a potential candidate for improved patient outcomes when used for early sedation after TBI due to its potential modulation of autonomic dysfunction. We examined early sedation patterns, as well as the association of dexmedetomidine exposure with clinical and functional outcomes among mechanically ventilated patients with moderate-severe TBI (msTBI) in the United States. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using data from the Premier dataset and identified a cohort of critically ill adult patients with msTBI who required MV from January 2016 to June 2020. msTBI was defined by head-neck abbreviated injury scale (AIS) values of 3 (serious), 4 (severe), and 5 (critical). We described early continuous sedative utilization patterns. Using propensity-matched models, we examined the association of early dexmedetomidine exposure (within 2 days of intensive care unit [ICU] admission) with the primary outcome of hospital mortality and the following secondary outcomes: hospital length of stay (LOS), days on MV, vasopressor use after the first 2 days of admission, hemodialysis (HD) after the first 2 days of admission, hospital costs, and discharge disposition. All medications, treatments, and procedures were identified using date-stamped hospital charge codes. RESULTS: The study population included 19,751 subjects who required MV within 2 days of ICU admission. The patients were majority male and white. From 2016 to 2020, the annual percent utilization of dexmedetomidine increased from 4.05% to 8.60%. After propensity score matching, early dexmedetomidine exposure was associated with reduced odds of hospital mortality (odds ratio [OR], 0.59; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.47-0.74; P < .0001), increased risk for liberation from MV (hazard ratio [HR], 1.20; 95% CI, 1.09-1.33; P = .0003), and reduced LOS (HR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.01-1.22; P = .033). Exposure to early dexmedetomidine was not associated with odds of HD (OR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.73-1.78; P = .56), vasopressor utilization (OR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.78-1.55; P = .60), or increased hospital costs (relative cost ratio, 1.98; 95% CI, 0.93-1.03; P = .66). CONCLUSIONS: Dexmedetomidine is being utilized increasingly as a sedative for mechanically ventilated patients with msTBI. Early dexmedetomidine exposure may lead to improved patient outcomes in this population.

Association of Early Dexmedetomidine Utilization With Clinical and Functional Outcomes Following Moderate-Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: A Transforming Clinical Research and Knowledge in Traumatic Brain Injury Study.

OBJECTIVE: To examine early sedation patterns, as well as the association of dexmedetomidine exposure, with clinical and functional outcomes among mechanically ventilated patients with moderate-severe traumatic brain injury (msTBI). DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study with prospectively collected data. SETTING: Eighteen Level-1 Trauma Centers, United States. PATIENTS: Adult (age > 17) patients with msTBI (as defined by Glasgow Coma Scale < 13) who required mechanical ventilation from the Transforming Clinical Research and Knowledge in TBI (TRACK-TBI) study. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Using propensity-weighted models, we examined the association of early dexmedetomidine exposure (within the first 5 d of ICU admission) with the primary outcome of 6-month Glasgow Outcomes Scale Extended (GOS-E) and the following secondary outcomes: length of hospital stay, hospital mortality, 6-month Disability Rating Scale (DRS), and 6-month mortality. The study population included 352 subjects who required mechanical ventilation within 24 hours of admission. The initial sedative medication was propofol for 240 patients (68%), midazolam for 59 patients (17%), ketamine for 6 patients (2%), dexmedetomidine for 3 patients (1%), and 43 patients (12%) never received continuous sedation. Early dexmedetomidine was administered in 77 of the patients (22%), usually as a second-line agent. Compared with unexposed patients, early dexmedetomidine exposure was not associated with better 6-month GOS-E (weighted odds ratio [OR] = 1.48; 95% CI, 0.98-2.25). Early dexmedetomidine exposure was associated with lower DRS (weighted OR = -3.04; 95% CI, -5.88 to -0.21). In patients requiring ICP monitoring within the first 24 hours of admission, early dexmedetomidine exposure was associated with higher 6-month GOS-E score (OR 2.17; 95% CI, 1.24-3.80), lower DRS score (adjusted mean difference, -5.81; 95% CI, -9.38 to 2.25), and reduced length of hospital stay (hazard ratio = 1.50; 95% CI, 1.02-2.20). CONCLUSION: Variation exists in early sedation choice among mechanically ventilated patients with msTBI. Early dexmedetomidine exposure was not associated with improved 6-month functional outcomes in the entire population, although may have clinical benefit in patients with indications for ICP monitoring.

Perioperative Complications in Patients with Systemic Sclerosis: A Comparative Cohort Analysis.

Background: Systemic sclerosis (SSc) is a rare autoimmune disorder with pathological manifestations affecting multiple organ systems. Few studies have examined perioperative outcomes in patients with this disorder. The primary aim of this retrospective single-center comparative cohort analysis was to estimate the incidence of select perioperative complications in a population of SSc patients. In an exploratory analysis, we analyzed the relationship between SSc and susceptibility to select perioperative complications when treated at a large quaternary-care institution. Methods: We conducted a single-center retrospective, comparative cohort study to compare perioperative outcomes in a SSc (n=258) and a frequency matched control cohort (n=632). We analyzed for the presence of major composite infection (MCI), major adverse cardiac events (MACE), 30-day readmission, 30-day mortality, in-hospital complications, length of stay and airway management outcomes. Results: MCI was higher in the SSc compared to the control cohort [adjusted odds ratio (ORadj)=5.02 (95%CI: 2.47-10.20) p<0.001]. Surgical site infection (3.5% vs. 0%, p<0.001), and other infection types (5% vs. 0%, p<0.001) were higher in the SSc cohort. MACE was not significantly different between SSc vs. Control groups [6.2% vs. 7.9%, ORadj=1.33 (95%CI: 0.61-2.91) p=0.48]. Higher rates of limited cervical range of motion (13.6% vs. 3.5%, p<0.001), microstomia (11.5% vs. 1.3%, p<0.001) and preoperative difficult airway designation (8.7% vs. 0.5%, p<0.001) were observed in the SSc cohort. Bag mask ventilation grade was similar between groups (p=0.44). After adjustment, there was no between-group difference in Cormack-Lehane grade 3 and 4 view on direct laryngoscopy in SSc patients [ORadj = 1.86 (95%CI: 0.612 -5.66) p=0.18] but evidence of higher rates of video laryngoscopy [ORadj= 1.87 (95%CI:1.07 - 3.27) p=0.03]. Length of stay [median: 0.2 vs. 0.3 days, p=0.08], 30-day mortality [1.2% vs. 0.6%, ORadj=2.79 (95%CI: 0.50-15.6) p=0.24] and readmission [11.5% vs. 8.1%, ORadj=1.64 (95%CI: 0.96 - 2.82) p=0.07] were not statistically significant. Conclusions: SSc patients demonstrate mostly similar rates of MACE, 30-day mortality, length of stay intraoperative and airway complications. There is evidence of increased risk of overall 30-day MCI risk and readmission after endoscopic procedures.

Intracarotid Infusion of Redox-Active Manganese Porphyrin, MnTnBuOE-2-PyP5+, following Reperfusion Improves Long-Term, 28-Day Post-Stroke Outcomes in Rats.

Endovascular mechanical thrombectomy, combined with a tissue plasminogen activator (t-PA), is efficacious as a standard care for qualifying ischemic stroke patients. However, > 50% of thrombectomy patients still have poor outcomes. Manganese porphyrins, commonly known as mimics of superoxide dismutases, are potent redox-active catalytic compounds that decrease oxidative/nitrosative stress and in turn decrease inflammatory responses, mitigating therefore the secondary injury of the ischemic brain. This study investigates the effect of intracarotid MnTnBuOE-2-PyP5+ (BMX-001) administration on long-term, 28-day post-stroke recovery in a clinically relevant setting. The 90 min of transient middle cerebral artery occlusion was performed in young, aged, male, female, and spontaneous hypertension rats. All physiological parameters, including blood pressure, blood gas, glucose, and temperature, were well controlled during ischemia. Either BMX-001 or a vehicle solution was infused through the carotid artery immediately after the removal of filament, mimicking endovascular thrombectomy, and was followed by 7 days of subcutaneous injection. Neurologic deficits and infarct volume were assessed at 28 days in a blinded manner. The effects of BMX-001 on the carotid arterial wall and blood-brain barrier permeability and its interaction with t-PA were assessed in normal rats. There were no intra-group differences in physiological variables. BMX-001-treated stroke rats regained body weight earlier, performed better in behavioral tests, and had smaller brain infarct size compared to the vehicle-treated group. No vascular wall damage and blood-brain barrier permeability changes were detected after the BMX-001 infusion. There was no drug interaction between BMX-001 and t-PA. Intracarotid BMX-001 infusion was safe, and it significantly improved stroke outcomes in rats. These findings indicate that BMX-001 is a candidate drug as an adjunct treatment for thrombectomy procedure to further improve the neurologic outcomes of thrombectomy patients. This study warrants further clinical investigation of BMX-001 as a new stroke therapy.

Association of Early Beta-Blocker Exposure and Functional Outcomes in Critically Ill Patients With Moderate to Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: A Transforming Clinical Research and Knowledge in Traumatic Brain Injury Study.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to 1) describe patterns of beta-blocker utilization among critically ill patients following moderate-severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) and 2) examine the association of early beta-blocker exposure with functional and clinical outcomes following injury. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: ICUs at 18 level I, U.S. trauma centers in the Transforming Clinical Research and Knowledge in TBI (TRACK-TBI) study. PATIENTS: Greater than or equal to 17 years enrolled in the TRACK-TBI study with moderate-severe TBI (Glasgow Coma Scale of <13) were admitted to the ICU after a blunt TBI. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS: Primary exposure was a beta blocker during the first 7 days in the ICU, with a primary outcome of 6-month Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended (GOSE). Secondary outcomes included: length of hospital stay, in-hospital mortality, 6-month and 12-month mortality, 12-month GOSE score, and 6-month and 12-month measures of disability, well-being, quality of life, and life satisfaction. MAIN RESULTS: Of the 450 eligible participants, 57 (13%) received early beta blockers (BB+ group). The BB+ group was on average older, more likely to be on a preinjury beta blocker, and more likely to have a history of hypertension. In the BB+ group, 34 participants (60%) received metoprolol only, 19 participants (33%) received propranolol only, 3 participants (5%) received both, and 1 participant (2%) received atenolol only. In multivariable regression, there was no difference in the odds of a higher GOSE score at 6 months between the BB+ group and BB- group (odds ratio = 0.86; 95% CI, 0.48-1.53). There was no association between BB exposure and secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: About one-sixth of subjects in our study received early beta blockers, and within this group, dose, and timing of beta-blocker administration varied substantially. No significant differences in GOSE score at 6 months were demonstrated, although our ability to draw conclusions is limited by overall low total doses administered compared with prior studies.

Economic Evaluation of Anesthesiology-Led Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Service.

BACKGROUND: Implementation of an anesthesiology-led cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) service can be viewed to have economic and efficiency challenges. This study evaluates the cost savings of an anesthesiology-led CIED service. METHODS: A total of 830 patients presented in the pre-implementation period from 1 March 2016 to 31 December 2017, and 1981 patients presented in the post-implementation period from 1 January 2018 to 31 October 2021. Interrupted time-series analysis for single-group comparisons was used to evaluate the cost savings resulting from reduction in operating room (OR) start delays for patients with CIEDs. RESULTS: OR start-time delay was reduced by 10.6 min (95%CI: -20.5 to -0.83), comparing pre- to post-implementation. For an OR cost of USD 45/min, we estimated the direct cost to the department to be USD 1.68/min. The intervention translated into a total cost reduction during the intervention period of USD 250,000 (USD 18,000 to USD 470,000) per year for the institution and USD 9800 (USD 730 to USD 17,000) per year for the department. The yearly cost of employing a full-time team of CIED specialists would have been USD 135,456. The service triggered electrophysiology consultation on 13 device malfunctions. CONCLUSIONS: An anesthesiology-led CIED service resulted in substantial cost savings, increased OR efficiency and patient safety.

Epidemiology, Resistance Profiles, and Outcomes of Bloodstream Infections in Community-Onset Sepsis in the United States.

OBJECTIVES: To describe frequency of positive blood cultures, patterns of pathogens' characteristics and their resistance profile in patients with blood cultures drawn due to a presumed diagnosis of community-onset sepsis, and to examine the association between blood culture-positive pathogens and hospital mortality. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Two hundred one U.S. hospitals from 2016 to 2020 using the Premier Healthcare Database. SUBJECTS: Adult patients presenting with community-onset sepsis who had blood cultures collected within 2 days of hospital admission. We defined sepsis using the U.S. Centers for Disease Control Adult Sepsis Event Surveillance criteria. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We identified 147,061 patients with community-onset sepsis. The number of blood culture-positive sepsis episodes was 21,167 (14%) and the number of nonblood culture-positive sepsis episodes was 20,326 (14%). Among patients with blood culture-positive sepsis, Gram-negative rods were isolated in 55% of patients, Gram-positive cocci were isolated in 47%. Of those, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) was 11%, ceftriaxone-resistant Enterobacterales /extended-spectrum ß-lactamase was 7%, and carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales was 1.3%. The crude in-hospital mortality was 17% for culture-negative sepsis, 13% for nonblood culture-positive sepsis, and 17% for blood culture-positive sepsis. In multilevel logistic regression models, compared with culture-negative sepsis, blood culture-positive sepsis (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.89; 95% CI, 0.85-0.94) and nonblood culture-positive sepsis (aOR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.78-0.87) were associated with lower odds of in-hospital mortality. Acinetobacter species, Pseudomonas aeruginosa , methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus , and MRSA were associated with higher in-hospital mortality, whereas Escherichia coli , Klebsiella species, Proteus species, and Streptococcus species were associated with lower in-hospital mortality. CONCLUSIONS: In patients hospitalized with community-onset sepsis, the prevalence of blood culture-positive sepsis was 14%. Among positive blood culture sepsis resistant organisms were infrequent. Compared with culture-negative sepsis, blood culture-positive sepsis and nonblood culture-positive sepsis were associated with lower in-hospital mortality.

Hemodynamic Management in the Prevention and Treatment of Delayed Cerebral Ischemia After Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage.

One of the most serious complications after subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) is delayed cerebral ischemia, the cause of which is multifactorial. Delayed cerebral ischemia considerably worsens neurological outcome and increases the risk of death. The targets of hemodynamic management of SAH have widely changed over the past 30 years. Hypovolemia and hypotension were favored prior to the era of early aneurysmal surgery but were subsequently replaced by the use of hypervolemia and hypertension. More recently, the concept of goal-directed therapy targeting euvolemia, with or without hypertension, is gaining preference. Despite the evolving concepts and the vast literature, fundamental questions related to hemodynamic optimization and its effects on cerebral perfusion and patient outcomes remain unanswered. In this review, we explain the rationale underlying the approaches to hemodynamic management and provide guidance on contemporary strategies related to fluid administration and blood pressure and cardiac output manipulation in the management of SAH.

Management of Muscle Relaxation With Rocuronium and Reversal With Neostigmine or Sugammadex Guided by Quantitative Neuromuscular Monitoring.

BACKGROUND: The optimal pharmacological reversal strategy for neuromuscular blockade remains undefined even in the setting of strong recommendations for quantitative neuromuscular monitoring by several national and international anesthesiology societies. We evaluated a protocol for managing rocuronium blockade and reversal, using quantitative monitoring to guide choice of reversal agent and to confirm full reversal before extubation. METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study and enrolled 200 patients scheduled for elective surgery involving the intraoperative use of rocuronium. Providers were asked to adhere to a protocol that was similar to local practice recommendations for neuromusculalr block reversal that had been used for >2 years; the protocol added quantitative monitoring that had not previously been routinely used at our institution. In this study, providers used electromyography-based quantitative monitoring. Pharmacological reversal was accomplished with neostigmine if the train-of-four (TOF) ratio was 0.40 to 0.89 and with sugammadex for deeper levels of blockade. The primary end point was the incidence of postoperative residual neuromuscular blockade (PRNB), defined as TOF ratio <0.9 at time of extubation. We further evaluated the difference in pharmacy costs had all patients been treated with sugammadex. RESULTS: A total of 189 patients completed the study: 66 patients (35%) were reversed with neostigmine, 90 patients (48%) with sugammadex, and 33 (17%) patients recovered spontaneously without pharmacological reversal. The overall incidence of residual paralysis was 0% (95% CI, 0-1.9). The total acquisition cost for all reversal drugs was United States dollar (USD) 11,358 (USD 60 per patient) while the cost would have been USD 19,312 (USD 103 per patient, 70% higher) if sugammadex had been used in all patients. CONCLUSIONS: A protocol that includes quantitative monitoring to guide reversal with neostigmine or sugammadex and to confirm TOF ratio ≥0.9 before extubation resulted in the complete prevention of PRNB. With current pricing of drugs, the selective use of sugammadex reduced the total cost of reversal drugs compared to the projected cost associated with routine use of sugammadex for all patients.

Guidelines for the Neurocritical Care Management of Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage.

BACKGROUND: The neurointensive care management of patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH) is one of the most critical components contributing to short-term and long-term patient outcomes. Previous recommendations for the medical management of aSAH comprehensively summarized the evidence based on consensus conference held in 2011. In this report, we provide updated recommendations based on appraisal of the literature using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology. METHODS: The Population/Intervention/Comparator/Outcome (PICO) questions relevant to the medical management of aSAH were prioritized by consensus from the panel members. The panel used a custom-designed survey instrument to prioritize clinically relevant outcomes specific to each PICO question. To be included, the study design qualifying criteria were as follows: prospective randomized controlled trials (RCTs), prospective or retrospective observational studies, case-control studies, case series with a sample larger than 20 patients, meta-analyses, restricted to human study participants. Panel members first screened titles and abstracts, and subsequently full text review of selected reports. Data were abstracted in duplicate from reports meeting inclusion criteria. Panelists used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation Risk of Bias tool for assessment of RCTs and the "Risk of Bias In Nonrandomized Studies - of Interventions" tool for assessment of observational studies. The summary of the evidence for each PICO was presented to the full panel, and then the panel voted on the recommendations. RESULTS: The initial search retrieved 15,107 unique publications, and 74 were included for data abstraction. Several RCTs were conducted to test pharmacological interventions, and we found that the quality of evidence for nonpharmacological questions was consistently poor. Five PICO questions were supported by strong recommendations, one PICO question was supported by conditional recommendations, and six PICO questions did not have sufficient evidence to provide a recommendation. CONCLUSIONS: These guidelines provide recommendations for or against interventions proven to be effective, ineffective, or harmful in the medical management of patients with aSAH based on a rigorous review of the available literature. They also serve to highlight gaps in knowledge that should guide future research priorities. Despite improvements in the outcomes of patients with aSAH over time, many important clinical questions remain unanswered.

Pro-Con Debate: Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Industry-Sponsored Research.

Pro: Nearly all new devices and drugs come from industry that provides two-thirds of the funding for medical research, and a much higher fraction of clinical research. Realistically, without corporate-funded studies, perioperative research would stagnate with little innovation and few new products. Opinions are ubiquitous and normal, but do not constitute epidemiologic bias. Competent clinical research includes many protections against selection and measurement bias, and the publication process provides at least moderate protection against misinterpretation of results. Trial registries largely prevent selective data presentation. Sponsored trials are particularly protected against inappropriate corporate influence because they are usually codesigned with the US Food and Drug Administration, and analyses are based on formal predefined statistical plans, as well as being conducted with rigorous external monitoring. Novel products, which are essential for advances in clinical care, largely come from industry, and industry appropriately funds much of the required research. We should celebrate industry's contribution to improvements in clinical care. Con: While industry funding contributes to research and discovery, examples of industry-funded research demonstrate bias. In the setting of financial pressures and potential conflict of interest, bias can influence the type of study design, hypotheses being tested, rigor and transparency in data analysis, interpretation, as well as reporting of the results. Unlike public granting agencies, industry does not necessarily provide funding based on unbiased peer review following an open call for proposals. The focus on success can influence the choice of a comparator, which might not be ideal among the possible alternatives, the language used in the publication, and even the ability to publish. Unpublished negative trials can result in selected information being withheld from the scientific community and the public. Appropriate safeguards are needed to ensure that research addresses the most important and relevant questions, that results are available even when they do not support the use of a product produced by the funding company, that populations studied reflect the relevant patients, that the most rigorous approaches are applied, that studies have the appropriate power to address the question posed, and that conclusions are presented in an unbiased manner.

Evaluation of a Protocol for the Management of Maintenance and Reversal of Rocuronium Block Using Neostigmine or Sugammadex.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative residual neuromuscular blockade (PRNB) is defined as an adductor pollicis train-of-four ratio (TOFR) <0.9. It is a common postoperative complication when nondepolarizing muscle relaxants are either not reversed or reversed with neostigmine. PRNB has been reported in 25% to 58% of patients who receive intermediate-acting nondepolarizing muscle relaxants, and it is associated with increased morbidity and decreased patient satisfaction. We conducted a prospective descriptive cohort study during the implementation of a practice guideline that included the selective use of sugammadex or neostigmine. The primary study aim of this pragmatic study was to estimate the incidence of PRNB at arrival to the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) when the practice guideline is followed. METHODS: We enrolled patients undergoing orthopedic or abdominal surgery requiring neuromuscular blockade. Rocuronium administration was guided by surgical requirements and based on ideal body weight, with dose reductions for women and/or age >55 years. Only qualitative monitoring was available to the anesthesia providers, and selection of sugammadex or neostigmine was guided by tactile assessments of the response to train-of-four (TOF) stimulation by a peripheral nerve stimulator. Neostigmine was administered if no fade was detected in the TOF response at the thumb. Deeper blocks were reversed with sugammadex. The prespecified primary and secondary end points were the incidence of PRNB at arrival to the PACU, defined as a normalized TOFR (nTOFR) < 0.9, and severe PRNB, defined as nTOFR <0.7 on arrival to the PACU. Anesthesia providers were blinded to all quantitative measurements made by research staff. RESULTS: Analysis included 163 patients, and 145 underwent orthopedic and 18 abdominal surgeries. Of the 163 patients, 92 (56%) were reversed with neostigmine and 71 (44%) with sugammadex. The overall incidence of PRNB at PACU arrival was 5 of 163 or 3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 1-7). The incidence of severe PRNB in PACU was 1% (95% CI, 0-4). Three of the 5 subjects with PRNB had TOFR <0.4 at time of reversal but were given neostigmine since anesthesia providers detected no fade by qualitative assessment. CONCLUSIONS: The use of a protocol that specifies rocuronium dosing and selective use of sugammadex versus neostigmine based on qualitative assessment of TOF count and fade allowed us to achieve an incidence of PRNB of 3% (95% CI, 1-7) at PACU arrival. Quantitative monitoring may be needed to further reduce this incidence.

Pro-Con Debate: Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Industry-Sponsored Research.

PRO: Nearly all new devices and drugs come from industry that provides two-thirds of the funding for medical research, and a much higher fraction of clinical research. Realistically, without corporate-funded studies, perioperative research would stagnate with little innovation and few new products. Opinions are ubiquitous and normal but do not constitute epidemiologic bias. Competent clinical research includes many protections against selection and measurement bias, and the publication process provides at least moderate protection against misinterpretation of results. Trial registries largely prevent selective data presentation. Sponsored trials are particularly protected against inappropriate corporate influence because they are usually codesigned with the US Food and Drug Administration, and analyses are based on formal predefined statistical plans, as well as being conducted with rigorous external monitoring. Novel products, which are essential for advances in clinical care, largely come from industry, and industry appropriately funds much of the required research. We should celebrate industry's contribution to improvements in clinical care. CON: While industry funding contributes to research and discovery, examples of industry-funded research demonstrate bias. In the setting of financial pressures and potential conflict of interest, bias can influence the type of study design, hypotheses being tested, rigor and transparency in data analysis, interpretation, as well as reporting of the results. Unlike public granting agencies, industry does not necessarily provide funding based on unbiased peer review following an open call for proposals. The focus on success can influence the choice of a comparator, which might not be ideal among the possible alternatives, the language used in the publication, and even the ability to publish. Unpublished negative trials can result in selected information being withheld from the scientific community and the public. Appropriate safeguards are needed to ensure that research addresses the most important and relevant questions, that results are available even when they do not support the use of a product produced by the funding company, that populations studied reflect the relevant patients, that the most rigorous approaches are applied, that studies have the appropriate power to address the question posed, and that conclusions are presented in an unbiased manner.