Impact of acute kidney injury on major adverse cardiovascular events in intensive care survivors.

Background: Acute kidney injury commonly occurs in patients admitted to ICU. After acute kidney injury, kidney function may not completely recover leading to increased risk of future cardiovascular events. We sought to ascertain the rates of cardiovascular events in ICU survivors and if these rates were affected by the presence of acute kidney injury whilst in ICU. Methods: This retrospective observational cohort study utilised routinely collected data to identify patients who had survived an admission to one of two ICUs between July 2015 and June 2018. Baseline serum creatinine and subsequent values were used to identify acute kidney injury. Major adverse cardiovascular events described were myocardial injury, coronary artery intervention, or radiological evidence of stroke. Results: Of the 3994 ICU survivors, major adverse cardiovascular events were identified in 385 patients (9.6%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 8.8-10.6%). Presence of acute kidney injury whilst in ICU was significantly associated with future major adverse cardiovascular events (hazard ratio=1.38; 95% CI 1.12-1.70; P-value=0.003) and future biochemical myocardial injury (hazard ratio=1.48; 95% CI 1.16-1.89; P-value=0.001). Acute kidney injury did not have a statistically significant association with future coronary artery interventions or future cerebrovascular events. Conclusions: One in 10 ICU survivors experiences a major adverse cardiovascular event after discharge. Acute kidney injury whilst in ICU was associated with an increased risk of major adverse cardiovascular events and specifically myocardial injury. Further research is warranted on whether ICU survivors with acute kidney injury merit enhanced strategies for cardiovascular protection.

Short- and long-term outcomes of intensive care patients with acute kidney disease.

BACKGROUND: Acute kidney disease (AKD) is a proposed definition for acute kidney injury (AKI) lasting 7 days or longer. Little has been reported regarding characteristics of patients with AKD and their short- and long-term outcomes. We describe the epidemiology and risk factors for AKD and outcomes following AKD. METHODS: This retrospective observational cohort study identified patients aged 16 or older admitted to the Glasgow Royal Infirmary and Queen Elizabeth University Hospital intensive care units (ICUs) in Scotland between 1st July 2015 and 30th June 2018. Baseline serum creatinine and subsequent values were used to identify patients with de-novo kidney injury (DNKI). Patients with recovery prior to day 7 were classified as AKI; recovery at day 7 or beyond was classified as AKD. Outcomes were in-hospital and long-term mortality, and proportion of major adverse kidney events (MAKEs). Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify risk factors for AKD. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to identify factors associated with long-term outcomes. FINDINGS: Of the 5,334 patients admitted to ICU who were assessed for DNKI, 1,620 (30·4%) suffered DNKI and of these, 403 (24·9%) met AKD criteria; 984 (60·7%) were male and the median age was 60·0 (IQR=48·0-72·0). Male sex, sepsis and lower baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) were associated with development of AKD. In-ICU (16·1%vs6·2%) and in-hospital (26·1%vs11·6%) mortality rates were significantly higher in AKD patients than AKI patients. Long-term survival was not different for AKD patients (HR=1·16; p-value=0·261) but AKD was associated with subsequent MAKEs (OR=1·25). INTERPRETATION: One in four ICU patients with DNKI met AKD criteria. These patients had an increased risk of short-term mortality and long-term MAKEs. Whilst the trend for long-term survival was lower, this was not significantly different from shorter-term AKI patients. Patients with AKD during their ICU stay should be identified to initiate interventions to reduce risk of future MAKEs. FUNDING: No funding was associated with this study.

A Metabolomics approach for the diagnosis Of SecondAry InfeCtions in COVID-19 (MOSAIC): a study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Critically ill patients with COVID-19 are at an increased risk of developing secondary bacterial infections. These are both difficult to diagnose and are associated with an increased mortality. Metabolomics may aid clinicians in diagnosing secondary bacterial infections in COVID-19 through identification and quantification of disease specific biomarkers, with the aim of identifying underlying causative microorganisms and directing antimicrobial therapy. METHODS: This is a multi-centre prospective diagnostic observational study. Patients with COVID-19 will be recruited from critical care units in three Scottish hospitals. Three serial blood samples will be taken from patients, and an additional sample taken if a patient shows clinical or microbiological evidence of secondary infection. Samples will be analysed using LC-MS and subjected to bioinformatic processing and statistical analysis to explore the metabolite changes associated with bacterial infections in COVID-19 patients. Comparisons of the data sets will be made with standard microbiological and biochemical methods of diagnosing infection. DISCUSSION: Metabolomics analyses may provide additional strategies for identifying secondary infections, which might permit faster initiation of specific tailored antimicrobial therapy to critically ill patients with COVID-19.

Propofol Target-Controlled Infusion in Emergency Department Sedation (ProTEDS): a multicentre, single-arm feasibility study.

BACKGROUND: Procedural sedation is a core skill of the emergency physician. Bolus administration of propofol is widely used in UK EDs. Titrated to an end point of sedation, it has a rapid effect but has been associated with adverse incidents. The use of a target-controlled infusion (TCI) of propofol is not routine but may reduce the incidence of adverse incidents.The primary aims of this single-arm feasibility study were patient satisfaction and to establish recruitment rates for a randomised controlled trial comparing propofol TCI to bolus administration. METHODS: Four EDs in Scotland, UK, participated. Patients aged 18-65 years, with anterior shoulder dislocation, weight ≥ 50kg, fasted ≥ 90 min were screened. Patients underwent reduction of their dislocated shoulder using TCI propofol. The primary end point was patient satisfaction recorded on a Visual Analogue Scale. RESULTS: Between 3 April 2017 and 31 December 2018, 25 patients were recruited with a recruitment rate of 20% for the 16-month recruitment window, with a temporary pause to allow amendment of drug dosage.Two patients were excluded. Twenty achieved adequate sedation, defined as a Modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation Scale (OAA/S) 3. Successful reduction was achieved in all adequately sedated. Patient satisfaction was documented in 14 patients, mean±SD of 97±9 and time to sedation was 25±8 min. No adverse events were recorded using the Society of Intravenous Anaesthesia adverse event reporting tool. CONCLUSION: Propofol TCI was acceptable as a method of procedural sedation for patients. The lower than expected recruitment rates highlight the need for dedicated research support. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03442803.

Effect of target-controlled propofol infusion to reduce the incidence of adverse events for procedural sedation in the emergency department: a systematic review.

The administration of propofol target-controlled infusion (TCI) for procedural sedation is standard in a range of hospital settings except for the Emergency Department (ED). Propofol TCI could be an alternative, safer way to provide procedural sedation in the ED compared with other methods of propofol administration. We compare the incidence of adverse events using propofol TCI compared with other methods of propofol administration. We conducted a systematic review of the literature from 1946 to January 2019 identifying studies that compared propofol TCI with other propofol regimens for procedural sedation in the adult population. Studies were assessed for risk of bias using the Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool. Seven articles were included. There was significant methodological heterogeneity in all aspects of study designs and definitions of adverse events which precluded a meta-analysis. A systematic review of the studies demonstrated fewer respiratory and cardiovascular adverse outcomes in three of the seven studies. It was not possible to determine if propofol TCI reduces the incidence of adverse events when compared with other sedating regimens using propofol using a descriptive systematic review of the relevant literature. Further research is required to compare the incidence of adverse events using propofol TCI for procedural sedation with other methods of administration in the ED. Future systematic reviews and meta-analysis comparisons would be aided by the use of standard adverse event reporting tools such as that of the Society of Intravenous Anaesthesia.

A study protocol for a feasibility study: Propofol Target-Controlled Infusion in Emergency Department Sedation (ProTEDS)-a multi-centre feasibility study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Procedural sedation is a core skill of the emergency physician. Bolus administration of propofol is widely utilised in UK emergency departments to provide procedural sedation. Bolus administration of propofol, titrated to an endpoint of sedation, has a rapid effect but can easily result in apnoea and loss of airway patency. The use of a target-controlled infusion of propofol allows for controlled titration to an effect site concentration and may reduce the rate of adverse incidents. Target-controlled infusion of propofol is not currently used in emergency departments.The primary aim of this feasibility study is to ensure that propofol target-controlled infusion (TCI) is acceptable to the patient and that recruitment rates are adequate to power a randomised controlled trial comparing propofol target-controlled infusion versus bolus administration. METHODS: This study will recruit in four emergency departments in Scotland, UK. Patients aged 18-65 years with anterior shoulder dislocation, weighing ≥ 50 kg and fasted ≥ 90 min, will be screened. Recruited patients will undergo emergency reduction of a dislocated shoulder facilitated by procedural sedation utilising TCI of propofol.The widespread adoption of TCI propofol by emergency departments will require evidence that it is safe, potentially effective, patient centred and a timely method of providing procedural sedation. The primary endpoint will be acceptability measured by patient satisfaction. The secondary endpoints will include incidence and severity of adverse events, number of shoulder reduction attempts, nursing opinion of patient experience, patient's reported pain score and time from commencement of TCI propofol sedation to desired sedation level.The study will be open for recruitment from April 2017 to December 2018. DISCUSSION: If the study demonstrates patient acceptability with adequate recruitment, we will be in a position to determine the feasibility of progression to a randomised controlled clinical trial of TCI compared to bolus administration of propofol. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03442803. Registered retrospectively on 22 February 2018.