Noninvasive Monitoring of Arterial Pressure: Finger or Lower Leg As Alternatives to the Upper Arm: A Prospective Study in Three ICUs.

OBJECTIVES: When the upper arm is inaccessible for measurements of arterial pressure (AP), the best alternative site is unknown. We performed a between-site comparison of the agreement between invasive and noninvasive readings of AP taken at the lower leg, the finger, and the upper arm. The risk associated with measurement errors and the trending ability were also assessed. DESIGN: Prospective observational study. SETTING: Three ICUs. PATIENTS: Patients having an arterial catheter and an arm circumference less than 42 cm. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Three triplicates of AP measurements were collected via an arterial catheter (reference AP), a finger cuff system (ClearSight; Edward Lifesciences, Irvine, CA), and an oscillometric cuff (at the lower leg then the upper arm). Trending ability was assessed through an additional set of measurements after a cardiovascular intervention. The default bed backrest angle was respected. Failure to measure and display AP occurred in 19 patients (13%) at the finger, never at other sites. In 130 patients analyzed, the agreement between noninvasive and invasive readings was worse at the lower leg than that observed at the upper arm or the finger (for mean AP, bias ± sd of 6.0 ± 15.8 vs 3.6 ± 7.1 and 0.1 ± 7.4 mm Hg, respectively; p < 0.05), yielding a higher frequency of error-associated clinical risk (no risk for 64% vs 84% and 86% of measurements, respectively, p < 0.0001). According to the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 81060-2:2018 standard, mean AP measurements were reliable at the upper arm and the finger, not the lower leg. In 33 patients reassessed after a cardiovascular intervention, both the concordance rate for change in mean AP and the ability to detect a therapy-induced significant change were good and similar at the three sites. CONCLUSIONS: As compared with lower leg measurements of AP, finger measurements were, when possible, a preferable alternative to upper arm ones.

Intravenous Milrinone for Cerebral Vasospasm in Subarachnoid Hemorrhage: The MILRISPASM Controlled Before-After Study.

BACKGROUND: Intravenous (IV) milrinone, in combination with induced hypertension, has been proposed as a treatment option for cerebral vasospasm after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH). However, data on its safety and efficacy are scarce. METHODS: This was a controlled observational study conducted in an academic hospital with prospectively and retrospectively collected data. Consecutive patients with cerebral vasospasm following aSAH and treated with both IV milrinone (0.5 µg/kg/min-1, as part of a strict protocol) and induced hypertension were compared with a historical control group receiving hypertension alone. Multivariable analyses aimed at minimizing potential biases. We assessed (1) 6-month functional disability (defined as a score between 2 and 6 on the modified Rankin Scale) and vasospasm-related brain infarction, (2) the rate of first-line or rescue endovascular angioplasty for vasospasm, and (3) immediate tolerance to IV milrinone. RESULTS: Ninety-four patients were included (41 and 53 in the IV milrinone and the control group, respectively). IV milrinone infusion was independently associated with a lower likelihood of 6-month functional disability (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 0.28, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.10-0.77]) and vasospasm-related brain infarction (aOR = 0.19, 95% CI 0.04-0.94). Endovascular angioplasty was less frequent in the IV milrinone group (6 [15%] vs. 28 [53%] patients, p = 0.0001, aOR = 0.12, 95% CI 0.04-0.38). IV milrinone (median duration of infusion, 5 [2-8] days) was prematurely discontinued owing to poor tolerance in 12 patients, mostly (n = 10) for "non/hardly-attained induced hypertension" (mean arterial blood pressure < 100 mmHg despite 1.5 µg/kg/min-1 of norepinephrine). However, this event was similarly observed in IV milrinone and control patients (n = 10 [24%] vs. n = 11 [21%], respectively, p = 0.68). IV milrinone was associated with a higher incidence of polyuria (IV milrinone patients had creatinine clearance of 191 [153-238] ml/min-1) and hyponatremia or hypokalemia, whereas arrhythmia, myocardial ischemia, and thrombocytopenia were infrequent. CONCLUSIONS: Despite its premature discontinuation in 29% of patients as a result of its poor tolerance, IV milrinone was associated with a lower rate of endovascular angioplasty and a positive impact on long-term neurological and radiological outcomes. These preliminary findings encourage the conduction of confirmatory randomized trials.

Iodinated contrast medium: Is there a re(n)al problem? A clinical vignette-based review.

As we were taught, for decades, that iodinated contrast-induced acute kidney injury should be dreaded, considerable efforts were made to find out effective measures in mitigating the renal risk of iodinated contrast media. Imaging procedures were frequently either downgraded (unenhanced imaging) or deferred as clinicians felt that the renal risk pertaining to contrast administration outweighed the benefits of an enhanced imaging. However, could we have missed the point? Among the abundant literature about iodinated contrast-associated acute kidney injury, recent meaningful advances may help sort out facts from false beliefs. Hence, there is increasing evidence that the nephrotoxicity directly attributable to modern iodinated CM has been exaggerated. Failure to demonstrate a clear benefit from most of the tested prophylactic measures might be an indirect consequence. However, the toxic potential of iodinated contrast media is well established experimentally and should not be overlooked completely when making clinical decisions. We herein review these advances in disease and pathophysiologic understanding and the associated clinical crossroads through a typical case vignette in the critical care setting.

Risk factors for poor performance in finger cuff non-invasive monitoring of arterial pressure: A prospective multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: Compared to the invasive technique, non-invasive monitoring of arterial pressure favors easier and faster implementation while potentially sacrificing some reliability. This may be particularly true for the Clearsight™ system (Edwards Lifesciences), which enables continuous monitoring. We evaluated the risk factors for its poor performance. METHODS: Patients with an arterial catheter and stable mean arterial pressure (MAP) over a 5-min period were included. Six pairs of invasive and Clearsight measurements of MAP were collected and the bias between the two techniques was calculated. Poor performance of the Clearsight™ system was defined as either a failure to measure and display MAP or displaying an erroneous MAP (individual bias > 5 mmHg). Fingertip perfusion was assessed using the plethysmographic perfusion index (PI) and the capillary refill time (CRT). RESULTS: Among 152 ICU patients (MAP of 81 ± 14 mmHg, norepinephrine in 78 [51%]), 78 (51%) experienced a poor performance of the Clearsight™ system: failure to display MAP in 19 (13%) patients, and erroneous value displayed in 59 (44%). In multivariate analysis, PI ≤ 0.85% (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 2.94 [95% confidence interval (95%CI):1.34;6.45]), CRT > 4 s (aOR = 5.28 [95%CI 1.39;20.05]), and the presence of hand edema (aOR = 2.06 [95%CI 1.01;4.21]) were associated with a higher likelihood of poor performance. Cardiac arrhythmia (aOR = 1.39 [95%CI 0.64;3.02]) and other tested variables were not associated with poor performance. CONCLUSIONS: Half of the included patients exhibited poor Clearsight™ system performance. Our results caution against using finger cuff arterial pressure monitoring in patients with low PI (≤0.85%), protracted CRT (>4 s), or hand edema. REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04269382, Dr. G. Muller, February 13, 2020. https://classic. CLINICALTRIALS: gov/ct2/show/NCT04269382.

Continued enteral nutrition until extubation compared with fasting before extubation in patients in the intensive care unit: an open-label, cluster-randomised, parallel-group, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Fasting is frequently imposed before extubation in patients in intensive care units, with the aim to reduce risk of aspiration. This unevaluated practice might delay extubation, increase workload, and reduce caloric intake. We aimed to compare continued enteral nutrition until extubation with fasting before extubation in patients in the intensive care unit. METHODS: We conducted an open-label, cluster-randomised, parallel-group, non-inferiority trial in 22 intensive care units in France. Patients aged 18 years or older were eligible for enrolment if they had received invasive mechanical ventilation for at least 48 h in the intensive care unit and received prepyloric enteral nutrition for at least 24 h at the time of extubation decision. Centres were randomly assigned (1:1) to continued enteral nutrition until extubation or 6-h fasting with concomitant gastric suctioning before extubation, to be applied for all patients within the unit. Masking was not possible because of the nature of the trial. The primary outcome was extubation failure (composite criteria of reintubation or death) within 7 days after extubation, assessed in both the intention-to-treat and per-protocol populations. The non-inferiority margin was set at 10%. Pneumonia within 14 days of extubation was a key secondary endpoint. This trial is now complete and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03335345. FINDINGS: Between April 1, 2018, and Oct 31, 2019, 7056 patients receiving enteral nutrition and mechanical ventilation were admitted to the intensive care units and 4198 were assessed for eligibility. 1130 patients were enrolled and included in the intention-to-treat population and 1008 were included in the per-protocol population. In the intention-to-treat population, extubation failure occurred in 106 (17·2%) of 617 patients assigned to receive continued enteral nutrition until extubation versus 90 (17·5%) of 513 assigned to fasting, meeting the a priori defined non-inferiority criterion (absolute difference -0·4%, 95% CI -5·2 to 4·5). In the per-protocol population, extubation failure occurred in 101 (17·0%) of 595 patients assigned to receive continued enteral nutrition versus 74 (17·9%) of 413 assigned to fasting (absolute difference -0·9%, 95% CI -5·6 to 3·7). Pneumonia within 14 days of extubation occurred in ten (1·6%) patients assigned to receive continued enteral nutrition and 13 (2·5%) assigned to fasting (rate ratio 0·77, 95% CI 0·22 to 2·69). INTERPRETATION: Continued enteral nutrition until extubation in critically ill patients in the intensive care unit was non-inferior to a 6-h fasting maximum gastric vacuity strategy comprising continuous gastric tube suctioning, in terms of extubation failure within 7 days (a patient-centred outcome), and thus represents a potential alternative in this population. FUNDING: French Ministry of Health. TRANSLATION: For the Chinese translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Randomised comparison of Enk™ and Manujet™ for emergency tracheal oxygenation with a high-fidelity full-scale simulation.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to compare time and difficulties of emergency tracheal oxygenation with Enk™ or Manujet™ by anaesthesiologists or intensivists, in a full-scale cannot ventilate and intubate scenarios on a SimMan3G™ high-fidelity patient simulator. METHODS: After ethical committee approval and written informed consent, teams (two to three learners with at least one physician senior) participating at a difficult airway training with a massive sublingual haematoma scenario, were randomised in Enk™ (E) group (29 teams, 76 learners) and Manujet™ (M) group (31 teams, 84 learners) according to the device at disposal. Main criterion was time between taking device in hand and first insufflation delay. Data were medians [25-75%]. RESULTS: The handling-insufflation time was shorter with Enk™ than with Manujet™ (74 [54-87] seconds versus 95 [73-123] seconds (s), P=0.0112). The team number performing insufflation within one minute after device handling was higher in the E group (8, 27.6%) than in the M group (2, 6.4%) (P=0.0392) as well as the team number performing insufflation within 90s in the E group (22, 75.09%) than in the M group (12, 38.7%) (P=0.0047). In E group, 75% of learners reported no difficulty versus 58.8% in M group (P=0.0443). Insufflation frequency was high in both groups and higher than 12min-1 in 51.7% of the teams. CONCLUSION: In a simulation context, Enk™ use is faster and easier. A high insufflation rate was also in favour of Enk™ that generates lower airway pressures.

Contrast-associated acute kidney injury in the critically ill: systematic review and Bayesian meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Critically ill patients, among whom acute kidney injury is common, are often considered particularly vulnerable to iodinated contrast medium nephrotoxicity. However, the attributable incidence remains uncertain given the paucity of observational studies including a control group. This study assessed acute kidney injury incidence attributable to iodinated contrast media in critically ill patients based on new data accounting for sample and effect size and including a control group. METHODS: Systematic review of studies measuring incidence of acute kidney injury in critically ill patients following contrast medium exposure compared to matched unexposed patients. Patient-level meta-analysis implementing a Bayesian nested mixed effects multiple logistic regression model. RESULTS: Ten studies were identified; only four took into account the baseline acute kidney injury risk, three by patient matching (560 patients). Objective meta-analysis of these three studies (vague and impartial a priori hypothesis concerning attributable acute kidney injury risk) did not find that iodinated contrast media increased the incidence of acute kidney injury (odds ratio 0.95, 95% highest posterior density interval 0.45-1.62). Bayesian analysis demonstrated that, to conclude in favor of a statistically significant incidence of acute kidney injury attributable to contrast media despite this observed lack of association, one's a priori belief would have to be very strongly biased, assigning to previous uncontrolled reports 3-12 times the weight of evidence strength provided by the matched studies including a control group. CONCLUSIONS: Meta-analysis of matched cohort studies of iodinated contrast medium exposure does not support a significant incidence of acute kidney injury attributable to iodinated contrast media in critically ill patients.