Design and rationale of the atrial fibrillation occurring transiently with stress (AFOTS) incidence study.

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is often detected for the first time in patients hospitalized for medical illness or non-cardiovascular surgery. AF occurring transiently with stress (AFOTS) describes this manifestation of AF, which may either be the result of a non-cardiac stressor, or existing paroxysmal AF that was not previously detected. Current estimates of AFOTS incidence are imprecise: ranging from 1 to 44%, owing to the marked heterogeneity in patient populations, identification and methods used to detect AFOTS. METHODS: The prospective, two-centre epidemiological AFOTS Incidence study will enroll 250 consecutive participants without a history of AF but with at increased risk of AF (Age ≥ 65 or >50 with one risk factor for AF) admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) for medical illness or non-cardiac surgery. Upon admission, participants will wear an ECG patch monitor that will remain in place for 14 days, or until discharge from hospital. Patients' consent to participation is deferred for up to 72 h after admission. The primary endpoint is the incidence of AF lasting ≥30 s. The study is powered to detect an AF incidence of 17% ±â€¯5%. RESULTS: We conducted a vanguard feasibility study, and 55 participants have completed participation. The median duration of monitoring was seven days. AF was detected by the clinical team in 8 participants (14%; 95% Confidence Interval 7-26%). CONCLUSIONS: The AFOTS Incidence study will employ a systematic and highly sensitive protocol for detecting AFOTS in medical illness and non-cardiac surgery ICU patients. This study is feasible and will provide a reliable estimate of the true incidence of AFOTS in this population.

Protocol adherence for continuously titrated interventions in randomized trials: an overview of the current methodology and case study.

BACKGROUND: The standard definition for protocol adherence is the proportion of all scheduled doses that are delivered. In clinical research, this definition has several limitations when evaluating protocol adherence in trials that study interventions requiring continuous titration. DISCUSSION: Building upon a specific case study, we analyzed a recent trial of a continuously titrated intervention to assess the impact of different definitions of protocol deviations on the interpretation of protocol adherence. The OVATION pilot trial was an open-label randomized controlled trial of higher (75-80 mmHg) versus lower (60-65 mmHg) mean arterial pressure (MAP) targets for vasopressor therapy in shock. In this trial, potential protocol deviations were defined as MAP values outside the targeted range for >4 consecutive hours during vasopressor therapy without synchronous and consistent adjustments of vasopressor doses. An adjudication committee reviewed each potential deviation to determine if it was clinically-justified or not. There are four reasons for this contextual measurement and reporting of protocol adherence. First, between-arm separation is a robust measure of adherence to complex protocols. Second, adherence assessed by protocol deviations varies in function of the definition of deviations and the frequency of measurements. Third, distinguishing clinically-justified vs. not clinically-justified protocol deviations acknowledges clinically sensible bedside decision-making and offers a clear terminology before the trial begins. Finally, multiple metrics exist to report protocol deviations, which provides different information but complementary information on protocol adherence. CONCLUSIONS: In trials of interventions requiring continuous titration, metrics used for defining protocol deviations have a considerable impact on the interpretation of protocol adherence. Definitions for protocol deviations should be prespecified and correlated with between-arm separation, if it can be measured.

A Systematic Review of Donor Serum Sodium Level and Its Impact on Transplant Recipients.

BACKGROUND: An important aspect of donor management is the optimization of serum sodium levels. OBJECTIVE: To perform a systematic review to determine the effects of donor sodium levels on heart, lung, kidney, and pancreas graft function, recipient mortality, and to identify the optimal donor serum sodium target. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Cochrane, Guideline databases, and trial registries from 1946 to May 2019 for studies investigating the effects of donor serum sodium levels on transplant outcomes in all non-hepatic organs. A two-step independent review process was used to identify relevant articles based on inclusion/exclusion criteria. We describe the results narratively, assess the risk of bias, and apply GRADE methodology to evaluate the certainty in the evidence. RESULTS: We included 18 cohort studies in our final analysis (n=28,007). 3 of 4 studies demonstrated an association between donor serum sodium and successful organ transplantation. 5 studies reported no association with graft function, while 6 studies did. 5 studies reported on recipient survival, 3 of which suggested donor sodium is unlikely to be associated with recipient survival. The included studies had serious risk of bias, and the certainty in evidence was deemed to be very low. CONCLUSION: In low risk of bias studies, donor sodium dysregulation is unlikely to affect kidney graft function or mortality of heart and kidney recipients, but the certainty in the evidence is very low due to inconsistency and imprecision. Further research is required to refine the serum sodium target range, quantify the dose-response curve, and identify organs most vulnerable to sodium dysregulation.

High flow nasal cannula compared with conventional oxygen therapy for acute hypoxemic respiratory failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: This systematic review and meta-analysis summarizes the safety and efficacy of high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. METHODS: We performed a comprehensive search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science. We identified randomized controlled trials that compared HFNC to conventional oxygen therapy. We pooled data and report summary estimates of effect using relative risk for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference or standardized mean difference for continuous outcomes, with 95% confidence intervals. We assessed risk of bias of included studies using the Cochrane tool and certainty in pooled effect estimates using GRADE methods. RESULTS: We included 9 RCTs (n = 2093 patients). We found no difference in mortality in patients treated with HFNC (relative risk [RR] 0.94, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.67-1.31, moderate certainty) compared to conventional oxygen therapy. We found a decreased risk of requiring intubation (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.74-0.99) or escalation of oxygen therapy (defined as crossover to HFNC in the control group, or initiation of non-invasive ventilation or invasive mechanical ventilation in either group) favouring HFNC-treated patients (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.51-0.98), although certainty in both outcomes was low due to imprecision and issues related to risk of bias. HFNC had no effect on intensive care unit length of stay (mean difference [MD] 1.38 days more, 95% CI 0.90 days fewer to 3.66 days more, low certainty), hospital length of stay (MD 0.85 days fewer, 95% CI 2.07 days fewer to 0.37 days more, moderate certainty), patient reported comfort (SMD 0.12 lower, 95% CI 0.61 lower to 0.37 higher, very low certainty) or patient reported dyspnea (standardized mean difference [SMD] 0.16 lower, 95% CI 1.10 lower to 1.42 higher, low certainty). Complications of treatment were variably reported amongst included studies, but little harm was associated with HFNC use. CONCLUSION: In patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure, HFNC may decrease the need for tracheal intubation without impacting mortality.

Approaches to interpreting and choosing the best treatments in network meta-analyses.

When randomized trials have addressed multiple interventions for the same health problem, network meta-analyses (NMAs) permit researchers to statistically pool data from individual studies including evidence from both direct and indirect comparisons. Grasping the significance of the results of NMAs may be very challenging. Authors may present the findings from such analyses in several numerical and graphical ways. In this paper, we discuss ranking strategies and visual depictions of rank, including the surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) curve method. We present ranking approaches' merits and limitations and provide an example of how to apply the results of a NMA to clinical practice.

Fluid type and the use of renal replacement therapy in sepsis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Fluid resuscitation, along with the early administration of antibiotics, is the cornerstone of treatment for patients with sepsis. However, whether differences in resuscitation fluids impact on the requirements for renal replacement therapy (RRT) remains unclear. To examine this issue, we performed a network meta-analysis (NMA), including direct and indirect comparisons, that addressed the effect of different resuscitation fluids on the use of RRT in patients with sepsis. The data sources MEDLINE, EMBASE, ACPJC, CINAHL and Cochrane Central Register were searched up to March 2014. Eligible studies included randomized trials reported in any language that enrolled adult patients with sepsis or septic shock and addressed the use of RRT associated with alternative resuscitation fluids. The risk of bias for individual studies and the overall certainty of the evidence were assessed. Ten studies (6664 patients) that included a total of nine direct comparisons were assessed. NMA at the four-node level showed that an increased risk of receiving RRT was associated with fluid resuscitation with starch versus crystalloid [odds ratio (OR) 1.39, 95% credibility interval (CrI) 1.17-1.66, high certainty]. The data suggested no difference between fluid resuscitation with albumin and crystalloid (OR 1.04, 95% CrI 0.78-1.38, moderate certainty) or starch (OR 0.74, 95% CrI 0.53-1.04, low certainty). NMA at the six-node level showed a decreased risk of receiving RRT with balanced crystalloid compared to heavy starch (OR 0.50, 95% CrI 0.34-0.74, moderate certainty) or light starch (OR 0.70, 95% CrI 0.49-0.99, high certainty). There was no significant difference between balanced crystalloid and saline (OR 0.85, 95% CrI 0.56-1.30, low certainty) or albumin (OR 0.82, 95% CrI 0.49-1.37, low certainty). Of note, these trials vary in terms of case mix, fluids evaluated, duration of fluid exposure and risk of bias. Imprecise estimates contributed to low confidence in most estimates of effect. Among the patients with sepsis, fluid resuscitation with crystalloids compared to starch resulted in reduced use of RRT; the same may be true for albumin versus starch.