Bispectral Index Monitoring Reduces the Dosage of Propofol and Adverse Events in Sedation for Endobronchial Ultrasound.

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines recommend monitoring the anesthetic depth of sedation during respiratory endoscopy by using clinical scales despite their subjective nature and the potential change in the level of sedation caused by frequent stimulation. Monitoring by means of the bispectral index (BIS) has shown its utility in reducing the use of drugs and their adverse events in general anesthesia, but evidence in prolonged sedation is insufficient. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to evaluate BIS in patients undergoing endobronchial ultrasound (EBUS). METHODS: A randomized cohort study of 90 patients with mediastinal lymph node involvement and/or lung or mediastinal lesions for whom EBUS was indicated, comparing the modified observer's assessment of alertness/sedation scale clinical evaluation (n = 45) versus the BIS evaluation (n = 45) of sedation with propofol-remifentanil, was conducted in order to evaluate the clinical parameters, doses used, adverse events, and tolerance of the procedure. RESULTS: We found a shorter waking time and a significantly lower dose of total propofol in the BIS group. Significantly fewer overall adverse events were recorded in the BIS group and included desaturation, hypotension, and bradypnea. Tolerance was better in the BIS group. No significant differences were found in terms of cough, memory of the procedure, or the level of difficulty of EBUS on the part of the pulmonologists. CONCLUSIONS: BIS monitoring of sedation in EBUS makes it possible to reduce the dosage of propofol, thereby shortening the waking time and reducing adverse events. This form of monitoring should be taken into consideration in the future for systematic use in prolonged sedation, as in the case of EBUS.

Prognostic power of proadrenomedullin in community-acquired pneumonia is independent of aetiology.

Biomarkers are useful in community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). Recently, midregional (MR) proadrenomedullin (proADM) has been shown to be of potential prognostic use. We sought to determine whether this prognostic role depends on the cause of CAP. We conducted a prospective cohort study of immunocompetent patients with CAP. Pneumonia Severity Index (PSI) and CURB-65 score (confusion (abbreviated mental test score of ≤ 8), urea ≥ 7 mol · L(-1), respiratory rate ≥ 30 breaths · min(-1), blood pressure <90 mmHg systolic or <60 mmHg diastolic, and age ≥ 65 yrs), blood C-reactive protein, procalcitonin, MR-proADM, and microbiological studies were systematically performed. Patients were grouped as bacterial, viral/atypical and mixed CAP, and were followed up at 30, 90 and 180 days, and 1 yr. We recruited 228 CAP patients. Identification of at least one pathogen was achieved in 155 (68%) patients. MR-proADM levels closely correlated with increasing severity scores, and showed an important predictive power for complications and short- and long-term mortality (1 yr). Its addition to PSI and CURB-65 significantly improved their prognostic accuracy. A MR-proADM cut-off of 0.646 nmol · L(-1) identified 92% of patients scored as PSI classes IV and V as high risk. MR-proADM outcome prediction power was not affected by different aetiologies. MR-proADM has high short- and long-term prognostic accuracy, and increases the accuracy of clinical scores. The prognostic value of MR-proADM is not modified by different possible CAP aetiologies.

Seasonal Influenza A H1N1pdm09 Virus and Severe Outcomes: A Reason for Broader Vaccination in Non-Elderly, At-Risk People.

BACKGROUND: Recent pandemics of influenza A H1N1pdm09 virus have caused severe illness, especially in young people. Very few studies on influenza A H1N1pdm09 in post-pandemic periods exist, and there is no information on the severity of both seasonal influenza A(H1N1) and A(H3N2) from the same season, adjusting for potential confounders, including vaccine. METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed a retrospective observational study of adults hospitalized during the 2014 season with influenza A(H1N1) or A(H3N2). All patients underwent the same diagnostic and therapeutic protocol in a single hospital, including early Oseltamivir therapy. We included 234 patients: 146 (62.4%) influenza A(H1N1) and 88 (37.6%) A(H3N2). A(H1N1) patients were younger (p<0.01), developed more pneumonia (p<0.01), respiratory complications (p = 0.015), ARDS (p = 0.047), and septic shock (p = 0.049), were more frequently admitted to the ICU (p = 0.022), required IMV (p = 0.049), and were less frequently vaccinated (p = 0.008). After adjusting for age, comorbidities, time from onset of illness, and vaccine status, influenza A(H1N1) (OR, 2.525), coinfection (OR, 2.821), and no vaccination (OR, 3.086) were independent risk factors for severe disease. CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalized patients with influenza A(H1N1) were more than twice as likely to have severe influenza. They were younger and most had not received the vaccine. Our findings suggest that seasonal influenza A(H1N1) maintains some features of pandemic viruses, and recommend wider use of vaccination in younger adult high-risk patients.