Acute respiratory distress syndrome in critically ill patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome.

CONTEXT: Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) is an emerging infectious disease with a 25% incidence of progression to acute lung injury (ALI)/acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and mortality exceeding 10%. OBJECTIVE: To describe the clinical spectrum and outcomes of ALI/ARDS in patients with SARS-related critical illness. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Retrospective case series of adult patients with probable SARS admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) of a hospital in Singapore between March 6 and June 6, 2003. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was 28-day mortality after symptom onset. RESULTS: Of 199 patients hospitalized with SARS, 46 (23%) were admitted to the ICU, including 45 who fulfilled criteria for ALI/ARDS. Mortality at 28 days for the entire cohort was 20 (10.1%) of 199 and for ICU patients was 17 (37%) of 46. Intensive care unit mortality at 13 weeks was 24 (52.2%) of 46. Nineteen of 24 ICU deaths occurred late (> or =7 days after ICU admission) and were attributed to complications related to severe ARDS, multiorgan failure, thromboembolic complications, or septicemic shock. ARDS was characterized by ease of derecruitment of alveoli and paucity of airway secretion, bronchospasm, or dynamic hyperinflation. Lower Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II scores and higher baseline ratios of PaO2 to fraction of inspired oxygen were associated with earlier recovery. CONCLUSIONS: Critically ill patients with SARS and ALI/ARDS had characteristic clinical findings, high rates of complications; and high mortality. These findings may provide useful information for optimizing supportive care for SARS-related critical illness.

Management plan to reduce risks in perioperative care of patients with obstructive sleep apnoea averts the need for presurgical polysomnography.

INTRODUCTION: Obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) is associated with increased perioperative morbidity and mortality. Patients at risk of OSA as determined by pre-anaesthesia screening based on the American Society of Anesthesiologists checklist were divided into 2 groups for comparison: (i) those who proceeded to elective surgery under a risk management protocol without undergoing formal polysomnography preoperatively and; (ii) those who underwent polysomnography and any subsequent OSA treatment as required before elective surgery. We hypothesised that it is clinically safe and acceptable for patients identified on screening as OSA at-risk to proceed for elective surgery without delay for polysomnography, with no increase in postoperative complications if managed on a perioperative risk reduction protocol. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective review of patients presenting to the preanaesthesia clinic over an 18-month period and identified to be OSA at-risk on screening checklist was conducted (n = 463). The incidence of postoperative complications for each category of OSA severity (mild-moderate and severe) in the 2 study groups was compared. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of cardiac (3.3% vs 2.3%), respiratory (14.3% vs 12.5%), and neurologic complications (0.6% vs 0%) between the screening-only and polysomnography-confirmed OSA groups respectively (P >0.05). There was good agreement of the OSA risk that is identified by screening checklist with OSA severity as determined on formal polysomnography (kappa coefficient = 0.953). CONCLUSION: Previously undiagnosed OSA is common in the presurgical population. In our study, there was no significant increase in postoperative complications in patients managed on the OSA risk management protocol. With this protocol, it is clinically safe to proceed with elective surgery without delay for formal polysomnography confirmation.