Diagnostic accuracy of a set of clinical and radiological criteria for screening of COVID-19 using RT-PCR as the reference standard.

BACKGROUND: The gold-standard method for establishing a microbiological diagnosis of COVID-19 is reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of a set of clinical-radiological criteria for COVID-19 screening in patients with severe acute respiratory failure (SARF) admitted to intensive care units (ICUs), using reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) as the reference standard. METHODS: Diagnostic accuracy study including a historical cohort of 1009 patients consecutively admitted to ICUs across six hospitals in Curitiba (Brazil) from March to September, 2020. The sample was stratified into groups by the strength of suspicion for COVID-19 (strong versus weak) using parameters based on three clinical and radiological (chest computed tomography) criteria. The diagnosis of COVID-19 was confirmed by RT-PCR (referent). RESULTS: With respect to RT-PCR, the proposed criteria had 98.5% (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 97.5-99.5%) sensitivity, 70% (95% CI 65.8-74.2%) specificity, 85.5% (95% CI 83.4-87.7%) accuracy, PPV of 79.7% (95% CI 76.6-82.7%) and NPV of 97.6% (95% CI 95.9-99.2%). Similar performance was observed when evaluated in the subgroups of patients admitted with mild/moderate respiratory disfunction, and severe respiratory disfunction. CONCLUSION: The proposed set of clinical-radiological criteria were accurate in identifying patients with strong versus weak suspicion for COVID-19 and had high sensitivity and considerable specificity with respect to RT-PCR. These criteria may be useful for screening COVID-19 in patients presenting with SARF.

The effects of acute kidney injury in a multicenter cohort of high-risk surgical patients.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Patients who develop post-operative acute kidney injury (AKI) have a poor prognosis, especially when undergoing high-risk surgery. Therefore, the objective of this study was to evaluate the outcome of patients with AKI acquired after non-cardiac surgery and the possible risk factors for this complication. METHODS: A multicenter, prospective cohort study with patients admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) after non-cardiac surgery was conducted to assess whether they developed AKI. The patients who developed AKI were then compared to non-AKI patients. RESULTS: A total of 29 ICUs participated, of which 904 high-risk surgical patients were involved in the study. The occurrence of AKI in the post-operative period was 15.8%, and the mortality rate of post-operative AKI patients at 28 days was 27.6%. AKI was strongly associated with 28-day mortality (OR = 2.91; 95% CI 1.51-5.62; p = 0.001), and a higher length of ICU and hospital stay (p < 0.001). Independent factors for the risk of developing AKI were pre-operative anemia (OR = 7.01; 95% CI 1.69-29.07), elective surgery (OR = 0.45; 95% CI 0.21-0.97), SAPS 3 (OR = 1.04; 95% CI 1.02-1.06), post-operative vasopressor use (OR = 2.47; 95% CI 1.34-4.55), post-operative infection (OR = 8.82; 95% CI 2.43-32.05) and the need for reoperation (OR= 7.15; 95% CI 2.58-19.79). CONCLUSION: AKI was associated with the risk of death in surgical patients and those with anemia before surgery, who had a higher SAPS 3, needed a post-operative vasopressor, or had a post-operative infection or needed reoperation were more likely to develop AKI post-operatively.

What has changed in venous thromboembolism prophylaxis for hospitalized patients over recent decades: review article.

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common disease with high rates of morbidity and mortality and is considered the number one cause of avoidable mortality among hospitalized patients. Although VTE incidence is extremely high in all countries and there is ample evidence that thromboprophylaxis inexpensively reduces the rate of thromboembolic complications in both clinical and surgical patients, a great deal of doubt remains with respect to patient safety with this type of intervention and in relation to the ideal thromboprophylaxis methods. Countless studies and evidence-based recommendations confirm the efficacy of prophylaxis for prevention of VTE and/or patient deaths, but it remains underutilized to this day. This article presents a wide-ranging review of existing prophylaxis methods up to the present, from guidelines and national and international studies of thromboprophylaxis.

Nurses' knowledge to identify early acute kidney injury.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the knowledgeof nurses on early identification of acute kidney injury (AKI) in intensive care, emergency and hospitalization units. METHOD: A prospective multi-center study was conducted with 216 nurses, using a questionnaire with 10 questions related to AKI prevention, diagnosis, and treatment. RESULTS: 57.2% of nurses were unable to identify AKI clinical manifestations, 54.6% did not have knowledge of AKI incidence in patients admitted to the ICU, 87.0% of the nurses did not know how to answer as regards the AKI mortality rate in patients admitted to the ICU, 67.1% answered incorrectly that slight increases in serum creatinine do not have an impact on mortality, 66.8% answered incorrectly to the question on AKI prevention measures, 60.4% answered correctly that loop diuretics for preventing AKI is not recommended, 77.6% answered correctly that AKI does not characterize the need for hemodialysis, and 92.5% said they had no knowledge of the Acute Kidney Injury Networkclassification. CONCLUSION: Nurses do not have enough knowledge to identify early AKI, demonstrating the importance of qualification programs in this field of knowledge. OBJETIVO: Avaliar o conhecimento do enfermeiro na identificação precoce da Injúria Renal Aguda (IRA) em Unidade de Terapia Intensiva, Unidade de Internação e Emergência. MÉTODO: Estudo multicêntrico, prospectivo.Participaram do estudo 216 enfermeiros,por meio de questionário com 10 questões relacionadas à prevenção, ao diagnóstico e ao tratamento da IRA. RESULTADOS: 57,2% não souberam identificar as manifestações clínicas da IRA, 54,6% não têm conhecimento da incidência de IRA em pacientes internados na UTI, 87,0% dos enfermeiros não souberam responder ao índice de mortalidade de IRA em pacientes internados na UTI, 67,1% responderam incorretamente que aumentos discretos da creatinina sérica não têm impacto na mortalidade, 66,8% responderam incorretamente à questão sobre as medidas de prevenção da IRA, 60,4% acertaram quando responderam que não é recomendada a utilização de diuréticos de alça na prevenção da IRA, 77,6% acertaram ao responder que IRA não caracteriza necessidade de hemodiálise e 92,5% disseram não conhecer a classificação AKIN. CONCLUSÃO: Enfermeiros não têm conhecimento suficiente para a identificação precoce da IRA, mostrando a importância de programas de capacitação nesta área do conhecimento.

Trends in perioperative practices of high-risk surgical patients over a 10-year interval.

INTRODUCTION: In Brazil, data show an important decrease in morbi-mortality of high-risk surgical patients over a 10-year high. The objective of this post-hoc study was to evaluate the mechanism explaining this trend in high-risk surgical patients admitted to Brazilian ICUs in two large Brazilian multicenter cohort studies performed 10 years apart. METHODS: The patients included in the 2 cohorts studies published in 2008 and 2018 were compared after a (1:1) propensity score matching. Patients included were adults who underwent surgeries and admitted to the ICU afterwards. RESULTS: After matching, 704 patients were analyzed. Compared to the 2018 cohort, 2008 cohort had more postoperative infections (OR 13.4; 95%CI 6.1-29.3) and cardiovascular complications (OR 1.5; 95%CI 1.0-2.2), as well as a lower survival ICU stay (HR = 2.39, 95% CI: 1.36-4.20) and hospital stay (HR = 1.64, 95% CI: 1.03-2.62). In addition, by verifying factors strongly associated with hospital mortality, it was found that the risk of death correlated with higher intraoperative fluid balance (OR = 1.03, 95% CI 1.01-1.06), higher creatinine (OR = 1.31, 95% CI 1.1-1.56), and intraoperative blood transfusion (OR = 2.32, 95% CI 1.35-4.0). By increasing the mean arterial pressure, according to the limits of sample values from 43 mmHg to 118 mmHg, the risk of death decreased (OR = 0.97, 95% CI 0.95-0.98). The 2008 cohort had higher fluid balance, postoperative creatinine, and volume of intraoperative blood transfused and lower mean blood pressure at ICU admission and temperature at the end of surgery. CONCLUSION: In this sample of ICUs in Brazil, high-risk surgical patients still have a high rate of complications, but with improvement over a period of 10 years. There were changes in the management of these patients over time.

The II Brazilian Guidelines for the pharmacological treatment of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 Joint Guidelines of the Associação Brasileira de Medicina de Emergência, Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira, Associação Médica Brasileira, Sociedade Brasileira de Angiologia e Cirurgia Vascular, Sociedade Brasileira de Infectologia, Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisiologia and Sociedade Brasileira de Reumatologia.

OBJECTIVE: To update the recommendations to support decisions regarding the pharmacological treatment of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in Brazil. METHODS: Experts, including representatives of the Ministry of Health and methodologists, created this guideline. The method used for the rapid development of guidelines was based on the adoption and/or adaptation of existing international guidelines (GRADE ADOLOPMENT) and supported by the e-COVID-19 RecMap platform. The quality of the evidence and the preparation of the recommendations followed the GRADE method. RESULTS: Twenty-one recommendations were generated, including strong recommendations for the use of corticosteroids in patients using supplemental oxygen and conditional recommendations for the use of tocilizumab and baricitinib for patients on supplemental oxygen or on noninvasive ventilation and anticoagulants to prevent thromboembolism. Due to suspension of use authorization, it was not possible to make recommendations regarding the use of casirivimab + imdevimab. Strong recommendations against the use of azithromycin in patients without suspected bacterial infection, hydroxychloroquine, convalescent plasma, colchicine, and lopinavir + ritonavir and conditional recommendations against the use of ivermectin and remdesivir were made. CONCLUSION: New recommendations for the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 were generated, such as those for tocilizumab and baricitinib. Corticosteroids and prophylaxis for thromboembolism are still recommended, the latter with conditional recommendation. Several drugs were considered ineffective and should not be used to provide the best treatment according to the principles of evidence-based medicine and to promote resource economy.

Dapagliflozin in patients with critical illness: rationale and design of the DEFENDER study.

BACKGROUND: Critical illness is a major ongoing health care burden worldwide and is associated with high mortality rates. Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors have consistently shown benefits in cardiovascular and renal outcomes. The effects of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors in acute illness have not been properly investigated. METHODS: DEFENDER is an investigator-initiated, multicenter, randomized, open-label trial designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin in 500 adult participants with acute organ dysfunction who are hospitalized in the intensive care unit. Eligible participants will be randomized 1:1 to receive dapagliflozin 10mg plus standard of care for up to 14 days or standard of care alone. The primary outcome is a hierarchical composite of hospital mortality, initiation of kidney replacement therapy, and intensive care unit length of stay, up to 28 days. Safety will be strictly monitored throughout the study. CONCLUSION: DEFENDER is the first study designed to investigate the use of a sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor in general intensive care unit patients with acute organ dysfunction. It will provide relevant information on the use of drugs of this promising class in critically ill patients. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV REGISTRY: NCT05558098.

Brazilian Guidelines for the pharmacological treatment of patients hospitalized with COVID-19: Joint guideline of Associação Brasileira de Medicina de Emergência, Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira, Associação Médica Brasileira, Sociedade Brasileira de Angiologia e Cirurgia Vascular, Sociedade Brasileira de Infectologia, Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisiologia, Sociedade Brasileira de Reumatologia. / Diretrizes Brasileiras para o tratamento farmacológico de pacientes hospitalizados com COVID-19: Diretriz conjunta da Associação Brasileira de Medicina de Emergência, Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira, Associação Médica Brasileira, Sociedade Brasileira de Angiologia e Cirurgia Vascular, Sociedade Brasileira de Infectologia, Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisiologia e Sociedade Brasileira de Reumatologia.

OBJECTIVE: Several therapies are being used or proposed for COVID-19, and many lack appropriate evaluations of their effectiveness and safety. The purpose of this document is to develop recommendations to support decisions regarding the pharmacological treatment of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in Brazil. METHODS: A group of 27 experts, including representatives of the Ministry of Health and methodologists, created this guideline. The method used for the rapid development of guidelines was based on the adoption and/or adaptation of existing international guidelines (GRADE ADOLOPMENT) and supported by the e-COVID-19 RecMap platform. The quality of the evidence and the preparation of the recommendations followed the GRADE method. RESULTS: Sixteen recommendations were generated. They include strong recommendations for the use of corticosteroids in patients using supplemental oxygen, the use of anticoagulants at prophylactic doses to prevent thromboembolism and the nonuse of antibiotics in patients without suspected bacterial infection. It was not possible to make a recommendation regarding the use of tocilizumab in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 using oxygen due to uncertainties regarding the availability of and access to the drug. Strong recommendations against the use of hydroxychloroquine, convalescent plasma, colchicine, lopinavir + ritonavir and antibiotics in patients without suspected bacterial infection and also conditional recommendations against the use of casirivimab + imdevimab, ivermectin and rendesivir were made. CONCLUSION: To date, few therapies have proven effective in the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19, and only corticosteroids and prophylaxis for thromboembolism are recommended. Several drugs were considered ineffective and should not be used to provide the best treatment according to the principles of evidence-based medicine and promote economical resource use.

OBJETIVOS: Há diversas terapias sendo utilizadas ou propostas para a COVID-19, muitas carecendo de apropriada avaliação de efetividade e segurança. O propósito deste documento é elaborar recomendações para subsidiar decisões sobre o tratamento farmacológico de pacientes hospitalizados com COVID-19 no Brasil. MÉTODOS: Um grupo de 27 membros, formado por especialistas, representantes do Ministério da Saúde e metodologistas, integra essa diretriz. Foi utilizado o método de elaboração de diretrizes rápidas, tomando por base a adoção e/ou a adaptação de recomendações a partir de diretrizes internacionais existentes (GRADE ADOLOPMENT), apoiadas pela plataforma e-COVID-19 RecMap. A qualidade das evidências e a elaboração das recomendações seguiram o método GRADE. RESULTADOS: Foram geradas 16 recomendações. Entre elas, estão recomendações fortes para o uso de corticosteroides em pacientes em uso de oxigênio suplementar, para o uso de anticoagulantes em doses de profilaxia para tromboembolismo e para não uso de antibacterianos nos pacientes sem suspeita de infecção bacteriana. Não foi possível fazer uma recomendação quanto à utilização do tocilizumabe em pacientes hospitalizados com COVID-19 em uso de oxigênio, pelas incertezas na disponibilidade e de acesso ao medicamento. Foi feita recomendação para não usar azitromicina, casirivimabe + imdevimabe, cloroquina, colchicina, hidroxicloroquina, ivermectina, lopinavir/ ritonavir, plasma convalescente e rendesivir. CONCLUSÃO: Até o momento, poucas terapias se provaram efetivas no tratamento do paciente hospitalizado com COVID-19, sendo recomendados apenas corticosteroides e profilaxia para tromboembolismo. Diversos medicamentos foram considerados ineficazes, devendo ser descartados, de forma a oferecer o melhor tratamento pelos princípios da medicina baseada em evidências e promover economia de recursos não eficazes.

Postoperative hypothermia following non-cardiac high-risk surgery: A prospective study of temporal patterns and risk factors.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Hypothermia occurs commonly during surgery and can cause postoperative complications. We aimed to describe the characteristics and outcomes of hypothermia in patients undergoing major surgeries. METHODS: This prospective, observational, multicenter study of a nationally representative sample included all patients over 18 years of age admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU). Thirty ICUs were selected randomly at national level. The main outcome measure was the proportion of patients who developed postoperative hypothermia in the first 24 hours of ICU admission. Patients were divided into three groups based on temperature: <35°C, <36°C, and ≥36°C (no hypothermia). Patients' characteristics, postoperative complications, and risk factors were evaluated in all groups. To verify whether hypothermia was a strong risk factor for postoperative complications, a Kaplan-Meier curve was generated and adjusted using a Cox regression model. RESULTS: In total, 738 patients had their temperatures measured. The percentage of patients with temperature <35°C (median [Q1-Q3], 34.7°C [34.3-34.9°C]) was 19.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 16.1-22.5) and that of patients with temperature <36°C (median [Q1-Q3], 35.4°C [35.0-35.8°C]) was 64% (95% CI = 58.3-70.0). The percentage of surgical complications was 38.9%. Patients with hypothermia were older, had undergone abdominal surgeries, had undergone procedures of longer duration, and had more comorbidities. A postoperative temperature ≤35°C was an independent risk for composite postoperative complications (hazard ratio = 1.523, 95% CI = 1.15-2.0), especially coagulation and infection. CONCLUSIONS: Inadvertent hypothermia was frequent among patients admitted to the ICU and occurred more likely after abdominal surgery, after a long procedure, in elderly patients, and in patients with a higher number of comorbidities. Low postoperative temperature was associated with postoperative complications.

Adverse outcomes of delayed intensive care unit. / Resultados adversos de admissões tardias à unidade de terapia intensiva a partir do pronto-socorro.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the impact of delayed transfer from the emergency room into the intensive care unit on the length of intensive care unit stay and death. METHODS: This prospective, cohort study performed in a tertiary academic hospital obtained data from 1913 patients admitted to the emergency room with a documented request for admission into the intensive care unit. The patients admitted directly into the medical-surgical intensive care unit (n = 209) were categorized into tertiles according to their waiting time for intensive care unit admission (Group 1: < 637 min, Group 2: 637 to 1602 min, and Group 3: > 1602 min). Patients who stayed in the intensive care unit for longer than 3.2 days (median time of intensive care unit length of stay of all patients) were considered as having a prolonged intensive care unit stay. RESULTS: A total of 6,176 patients were treated in the emergency room during the study period, among whom 1,913 (31%) required a bed in the intensive care unit. The median length of stay in the emergency room was 17 hours [9 to 33 hours]. Hospitalization for infection/sepsis was an independent predictor of prolonged intensive care unit stay (OR 2.75 95%CI 1.38 - 5.48, p = 0.004), but waiting time for intensive care unit admission was not. The mortality rate was higher in Group 3 (38%) than in Group 1 (31%) but the difference was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Delayed admission into the intensive care unit from the emergency room did not result in an increased intensive care unit stay or mortality.

Technical note and clinical instructions for Acute Kidney Injury (AKI) in patients with Covid-19: Brazilian Society of Nephrology and Brazilian Association of Intensive Care Medicine.

We produced this document to bring pertinent information to the practice of nephrology, as regards to the renal involvement with COVID-19, the management of acute kidney injury cases, and practical guidance on the provision of dialysis support.As information on COVID-19 evolves at a pace never before seen in medical science, these recommendations, although based on recent scientific evidence, refer to the present moment. The guidelines may be updated when published data and other relevant information become available.

Dapagliflozin in patients with critical illness: rationale and design of the DEFENDER study / Dapagliflozina em pacientes com doença crítica: justificativa e desenho do estudo DEFENDER

ABSTRACT Background: Critical illness is a major ongoing health care burden worldwide and is associated with high mortality rates. Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors have consistently shown benefits in cardiovascular and renal outcomes. The effects of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors in acute illness have not been properly investigated. Methods: DEFENDER is an investigator-initiated, multicenter, randomized, open-label trial designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin in 500 adult participants with acute organ dysfunction who are hospitalized in the intensive care unit. Eligible participants will be randomized 1:1 to receive dapagliflozin 10mg plus standard of care for up to 14 days or standard of care alone. The primary outcome is a hierarchical composite of hospital mortality, initiation of kidney replacement therapy, and intensive care unit length of stay, up to 28 days. Safety will be strictly monitored throughout the study. Conclusion: DEFENDER is the first study designed to investigate the use of a sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor in general intensive care unit patients with acute organ dysfunction. It will provide relevant information on the use of drugs of this promising class in critically ill patients. ClinicalTrials.gov registry: NCT05558098

RESUMO Antecedentes: A doença crítica é um importante ônus permanente da assistência médica em todo o mundo e está associada a altas taxas de mortalidade. Os inibidores do cotransportador de sódio-glicose do tipo 2 têm demonstrado consistentemente benefícios nos desfechos cardiovasculares e renais. Os efeitos dos inibidores do cotransportador de sódio-glicose do tipo 2 em doenças agudas ainda não foram devidamente investigados. Métodos: O DEFENDER é um estudo de iniciativa do investigador, multicêntrico, randomizado, aberto, desenhado para avaliar a eficácia e a segurança da dapagliflozina em 500 participantes adultos com disfunção orgânica aguda hospitalizados na unidade de terapia intensiva. Os participantes aptos serão randomizados 1:1 para receber 10mg de dapagliflozina e o tratamento padrão por até 14 dias ou apenas o tratamento padrão. O desfecho primário é um composto hierárquico de mortalidade hospitalar, início de terapia renal substitutiva e tempo de internação na unidade de terapia intensiva, até 28 dias. O monitoramento da segurança será rigoroso durante todo o estudo. Conclusão: O DEFENDER é o primeiro estudo desenvolvido para investigar o uso de um inibidor do cotransportador de sódio-glicose do tipo 2 em pacientes de unidade de terapia intensiva geral com disfunção orgânica aguda. O estudo fornecerá informações relevantes sobre o uso de medicamentos dessa classe promissora em pacientes críticos. Registro ClincalTrials.gov: NCT05558098

The II Brazilian Guidelines for the pharmacological treatment of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 Joint Guidelines of the Associação Brasileira de Medicina de Emergência, Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira, Associação Médica Brasileira, Sociedade Brasileira de Angiologia e Cirurgia Vascular, Sociedade Brasileira de Infectologia, Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisiologia and Sociedade Brasileira de Reumatologia / II Diretrizes Brasileiras para o tratamento farmacológico de pacientes hospitalizados com COVID-19 Diretriz conjunta da Associação Brasileira de Medicina de Emergência, Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira, Associação Médica Brasileira, Sociedade Brasileira de Angiologia e Cirurgia Vascular, Sociedade Brasileira de Infectologia, Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisiologia e Sociedade Brasileira de Reumatologia

ABSTRACT Objective: To update the recommendations to support decisions regarding the pharmacological treatment of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in Brazil. Methods: Experts, including representatives of the Ministry of Health and methodologists, created this guideline. The method used for the rapid development of guidelines was based on the adoption and/or adaptation of existing international guidelines (GRADE ADOLOPMENT) and supported by the e-COVID-19 RecMap platform. The quality of the evidence and the preparation of the recommendations followed the GRADE method. Results: Twenty-one recommendations were generated, including strong recommendations for the use of corticosteroids in patients using supplemental oxygen and conditional recommendations for the use of tocilizumab and baricitinib for patients on supplemental oxygen or on noninvasive ventilation and anticoagulants to prevent thromboembolism. Due to suspension of use authorization, it was not possible to make recommendations regarding the use of casirivimab + imdevimab. Strong recommendations against the use of azithromycin in patients without suspected bacterial infection, hydroxychloroquine, convalescent plasma, colchicine, and lopinavir + ritonavir and conditional recommendations against the use of ivermectin and remdesivir were made. Conclusion: New recommendations for the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 were generated, such as those for tocilizumab and baricitinib. Corticosteroids and prophylaxis for thromboembolism are still recommended, the latter with conditional recommendation. Several drugs were considered ineffective and should not be used to provide the best treatment according to the principles of evidence-based medicine and to promote resource economy.

RESUMO Objetivo: Atualizar as recomendações para embasar as decisões para o tratamento farmacológico de pacientes hospitalizados com COVID-19 no Brasil. Métodos: A elaboração desta diretriz foi feita por especialistas, incluindo representantes do Ministério da Saúde e metodologistas. O método utilizado para o desenvolvimento rápido de diretrizes baseou-se na adoção e/ou adaptação de diretrizes internacionais existentes (GRADE ADOLOPMENT) e contou com o apoio da plataforma e-COVID-19 RecMap. A qualidade das evidências e a elaboração das recomendações seguiram o método GRADE. Resultados: Chegaram-se a 21 recomendações, incluindo recomendações fortes quanto ao uso de corticosteroides em pacientes em uso de oxigênio suplementar e recomendações condicionais para o uso de tocilizumabe e baricitinibe, em pacientes com oxigênio suplementar ou ventilação não invasiva, e de anticoagulantes, para prevenção de tromboembolismo. Devido à suspensão da autorização de uso, não foi possível fazer recomendações para o tratamento com casirivimabe + imdevimabe. Foram feitas recomendações fortes contra o uso de azitromicina em pacientes sem suspeita de infecção bacteriana, hidroxicloroquina, plasma convalescente, colchicina e lopinavir + ritonavir, além de recomendações condicionais contra o uso de ivermectina e rendesivir. Conclusão: Foram criadas novas recomendações para o tratamento de pacientes hospitalizados com COVID-19, como as recomendações de tocilizumabe e baricitinibe. Ainda são recomendados corticosteroides e profilaxia contra tromboembolismo, esta em caráter condicional. Vários medicamentos foram considerados ineficazes e não devem ser usados, no intuito de proporcionar o melhor tratamento segundo os princípios da medicina baseada em evidências e promover a economia de recursos.

Diretrizes Brasileiras para o tratamento farmacológico de pacientes hospitalizados com COVID-19: Diretriz conjunta da Associação Brasileira de Medicina de Emergência, Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira, Associação Médica Brasileira, Sociedade Brasileira de Angiologia e Cirurgia Vascular, Sociedade Brasileira de Infectologia, Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisiologia e Sociedade Brasileira de Reumatologia / Brazilian Guidelines for the pharmacological treatment of patients hospitalized with COVID-19: Joint guideline of Associação Brasileira de Medicina de Emergência, Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira, Associação Médica Brasileira, Sociedade Brasileira de Angiologia e Cirurgia Vascular, Sociedade Brasileira de Infectologia, Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisiologia, Sociedade Brasileira de Reumatologia

Há diversas terapias sendo utilizadas ou propostas para a COVID-19, muitas carecendo de apropriada avaliação de efetividade e segurança. O propósito deste documento é elaborar recomendações para subsidiar decisões sobre o tratamento farmacológico de pacientes hospitalizados com COVID-19 no Brasil. Métodos: Um grupo de 27 membros, formado por especialistas, representantes do Ministério da Saúde e metodologistas, integra essa diretriz. Foi utilizado o método de elaboração de diretrizes rápidas, tomando por base a adoção e/ou a adaptação de recomendações a partir de diretrizes internacionais existentes (GRADE ADOLOPMENT), apoiadas pela plataforma e-COVID-19 RecMap. A qualidade das evidências e a elaboração das recomendações seguiram o método GRADE. Resultados: Foram geradas 16 recomendações. Entre elas, estão recomendações fortes para o uso de corticosteroides em pacientes em uso de oxigênio suplementar, para o uso de anticoagulantes em doses de profilaxia para tromboembolismo e para não uso de antibacterianos nos pacientes sem suspeita de infecção bacteriana. Não foi possível fazer uma recomendação quanto à utilização do tocilizumabe em pacientes hospitalizados com COVID-19 em uso de oxigênio, pelas incertezas na disponibilidade e de acesso ao medicamento. Foi feita recomendação para não usar azitromicina, casirivimabe + imdevimabe, cloroquina, colchicina, hidroxicloroquina, ivermectina, lopinavir/ ritonavir, plasma convalescente e rendesivir. Conclusão: Até o momento, poucas terapias se provaram efetivas no tratamento do paciente hospitalizado com COVID-19, sendo recomendados apenas corticosteroides e profilaxia para tromboembolismo. Diversos medicamentos foram considerados ineficazes, devendo ser descartados, de forma a oferecer o melhor tratamento pelos princípios da medicina baseada em evidências e promover economia de recursos não eficazes.

Several therapies are being used or proposed for COVID-19, and many lack appropriate evaluations of their effectiveness and safety. The purpose of this document is to develop recommendations to support decisions regarding the pharmacological treatment of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in Brazil. Methods: A group of 27 experts, including representatives of the Ministry of Health and methodologists, created this guideline. The method used for the rapid development of guidelines was based on the adoption and/or adaptation of existing international guidelines (GRADE ADOLOPMENT) and supported by the e-COVID-19 RecMap platform. The quality of the evidence and the preparation of the recommendations followed the GRADE method. Results: Sixteen recommendations were generated. They include strong recommendations for the use of corticosteroids in patients using supplemental oxygen, the use of anticoagulants at prophylactic doses to prevent thromboembolism and the nonuse of antibiotics in patients without suspected bacterial infection. It was not possible to make a recommendation regarding the use of tocilizumab in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 using oxygen due to uncertainties regarding the availability of and access to the drug. Strong recommendations against the use of hydroxychloroquine, convalescent plasma, colchicine, lopinavir + ritonavir and antibiotics in patients without suspected bacterial infection and also conditional recommendations against the use of casirivimab + imdevimab, ivermectin and rendesivir were made. Conclusion: To date, few therapies have proven effective in the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19, and only corticosteroids and prophylaxis for thromboembolism are recommended. Several drugs were considered ineffective and should not be used to provide the best treatment according to the principles of evidence-based medicine and promote economical resource use.

Nutrition in acute renal failure.

Nutritional status has been considered to be one of the possible determinants of mortality rates in cases of acute renal failure (ARF). However, most studies evaluating possible mortality indicators in ARF cases have not focused on the nutritional status, possibly because of the difficulties involved in assessing the nutritional status of critically ill patients. Although the traditional methods for assessing nutritional status are used for ARF patients, they are not the best choice in this population. The use of nutritional support for these patients has produced conflicting results regarding morbidity and mortality. This review covers the mechanisms and indicators of malnutrition in ARF cases and the types of nutritional support that may be used.

What happens to the fluid balance during and after recovering from septic shock?

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate the cumulative fluid balance during the period of shock and determine what happens to fluid balance in the 7 days following recovery from shock. METHODS: A prospective and observational study in septic shock patients. Patients with a mean arterial pressure ≥ 65 mmHg and lactate < 2.0 mEq/L were included < 12 hours after weaning from vasopressor, and this day was considered day 1. The daily fluid balance was registered during and for seven days after recovery from shock. Patients were divided into two groups according to the full cohort's median cumulative fluid balance during the period of shock: Group 1 ≤ 4.4 L (n = 20) and Group 2 > 4.4 L (n = 20). RESULTS: We enrolled 40 patients in the study. On study day 1, the cumulative fluid balance was 1.1 [0.6 - 3.4] L in Group 1 and 9.0 [6.7 - 13.8] L in Group 2. On study day 7, the cumulative fluid balance was 8.0 [4.5 - 12.4] L in Group 1 and 14.7 [12.7 - 20.6] L in Group 2 (p < 0.001 for both). Afterwards, recovery of shock fluid balance continued to increase in both groups. Group 2 had a more prolonged length of stay in the intensive care unit and hospital compared to Group 1. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, positive fluid balances are frequently seen in patients with septic shock and may be related to worse outcomes. During the shock period, even though the fluid balance was previously positive, it becomes more positive. After recovery from shock, the fluid balance continues to increase. The group with a more positive fluid balance group spent more time in the intensive care unit and hospital.

Septic shock: a major cause of hospital death after intensive care unit discharge.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the causes and factors associated with the death of patients between intensive care unit discharge and hospital discharge. METHODS: The present is a pilot, retrospective, observational cohort study. The records of all patients admitted to two units of a public/private university hospital from February 1, 2013 to April 30, 2013 were assessed. Demographic and clinical data, risk scores and outcomes were obtained from the Epimed monitoring system and confirmed in the electronic record system of the hospital. The relative risk and respective confidence intervals were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 581 patients were evaluated. The mortality rate in the intensive care unit was 20.8% and in the hospital was 24.9%. Septic shock was the cause of death in 58.3% of patients who died after being discharged from the intensive care unit. Of the patients from the public health system, 73 (77.6%) died in the intensive care unit and 21 (22.4%) died in the hospital after being discharged from the unit. Of the patients from the Supplementary Health System, 48 (94.1%) died in the intensive care unit and 3 (5.9%) died in the hospital after being discharged from the unit (relative risk, 3.87%; 95% confidence interval, 1.21 - 12.36; p < 0.05). The post-discharge mortality rate was significantly higher in patients with intensive care unit hospitalization time longer than 6 days. CONCLUSION: The main cause of death of patients who were discharged from the intensive care unit and died in the ward before hospital discharge was septic shock. Coverage by the public healthcare system and longer hospitalization time in the intensive care unit were factors associated with death after discharge from the intensive care unit.

Resultados adversos de admissões tardias à unidade de terapia intensiva a partir do pronto-socorro / Adverse outcomes of delayed intensive care unit

RESUMO Objetivo: Verificar o impacto da transferência tardia do pronto-socorro para a unidade de terapia intensiva no tempo de permanência na unidade e na ocorrência de óbitos. Métodos: Este estudo de coorte prospectiva foi conduzido em um hospital acadêmico terciário, com obtenção dos dados de 1.913 pacientes admitidos ao pronto-socorro com solicitação documentada de admissão à unidade de terapia intensiva. Os pacientes admitidos diretamente para a unidade de terapia intensiva médico-cirúrgica (n = 209) foram categorizados em tercis segundo o tempo de espera para admissão à unidade de terapia intensiva (Grupo 1: menos de 637 minutos; Grupo 2: entre 637 e 1.602 minutos, e Grupo 3: acima de 1.602 minutos). Os pacientes que permaneceram na unidade de terapia intensiva por mais de 3,2 dias (tempo mediano de tempo de permanência na unidade de terapia intensiva para todos os pacientes) foram considerados como tempo prolongado de permanência na unidade de terapia intensiva. Resultados: Foram tratados no pronto-socorro durante o período do estudo 6.176 pacientes, dentre os quais 1.913 (31%) necessitaram de um leito na unidade de terapia intensiva. O tempo mediano de permanência no pronto-socorro foi de 17 horas (9 - 33 horas). Hospitalização por infecção/sepse foi preditor independente para tempo prolongado de permanência na unidade (RC: 2,75; IC95% 1,38 - 5,48, p = 0,004), porém o tempo de espera para admissão à unidade de terapia intensiva não. A taxa de mortalidade foi mais elevada no Grupo 3 (38%) do que no Grupo 1 (31%), porém a diferença não foi estatisticamente significante. Conclusão: A admissão tardia à unidade de terapia intensiva a partir do pronto-socorro não resultou em aumento do tempo de permanência ou da mortalidade na unidade de terapia intensiva.

ABSTRACT Objective: To examine the impact of delayed transfer from the emergency room into the intensive care unit on the length of intensive care unit stay and death. Methods: This prospective, cohort study performed in a tertiary academic hospital obtained data from 1913 patients admitted to the emergency room with a documented request for admission into the intensive care unit. The patients admitted directly into the medical-surgical intensive care unit (n = 209) were categorized into tertiles according to their waiting time for intensive care unit admission (Group 1: < 637 min, Group 2: 637 to 1602 min, and Group 3: > 1602 min). Patients who stayed in the intensive care unit for longer than 3.2 days (median time of intensive care unit length of stay of all patients) were considered as having a prolonged intensive care unit stay. Results: A total of 6,176 patients were treated in the emergency room during the study period, among whom 1,913 (31%) required a bed in the intensive care unit. The median length of stay in the emergency room was 17 hours [9 to 33 hours]. Hospitalization for infection/sepsis was an independent predictor of prolonged intensive care unit stay (OR 2.75 95%CI 1.38 - 5.48, p = 0.004), but waiting time for intensive care unit admission was not. The mortality rate was higher in Group 3 (38%) than in Group 1 (31%) but the difference was not statistically significant. Conclusion: Delayed admission into the intensive care unit from the emergency room did not result in an increased intensive care unit stay or mortality.

Prevalence of Non-alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease and Steatohepatitis Risk Factors in Patients Undergoing Bariatric Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) associated with obesity comprises pathological changes ranging from steatosis to steatohepatitis; these can evolve to cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study are to assess the prevalence of and predictive markers for steatohepatitis in obese patients undergoing bariatric surgery. METHODS: A prospective study of 184 morbidly obese patients undergoing bariatric surgery formed the study cohort. Patients taking potentially hepatotoxic medications and those with viral diseases and a history of excessive alcohol consumption were excluded. Liver biopsies were performed during surgery with a "Trucut" needle. Patients were classified into the following groups according to the histopathological findings: normal, steatosis, mild steatohepatitis, and moderate-severe steatohepatitis. Factors associated with steatohepatitis were evaluated using logistic regression. p values <0.05 were considered significant. RESULTS: The prevalence of NAFLD was 84 % (steatosis, 22.0 %; mild steatohepatitis, 30.8 %; moderate-severe steatohepatitis, 32.0 %). Independent predictive factors for steatohepatitis were age (odds ratio (OR), 1.05; 95 % confidence interval (CI), 1.01-1.09; p = 0.011), waist circumference (OR, 1.03; 95 % CI, 1.00-1.06; p = 0.021), serum alanine aminotransferase (ALT) levels (OR, 1.04; 95 % CI, 1.01-1.08; p = 0.005), and serum triglyceride levels (OR, 1.01; 95 % CI, 1.00-1.01; p = 0.042). Score values for each predictor were derived from regression coefficients and odds ratio, and a total (risk) score was obtained from the sum of the points to evaluate the probability of having steatohepatitis. CONCLUSION: Age, waist circumference, serum ALT levels, and serum triglyceride levels are efficient and non-invasive predictive markers for the diagnosis and management of steatohepatitis in morbidly obese patients.