Tight Blood-Glucose Control without Early Parenteral Nutrition in the ICU.

BACKGROUND: Randomized, controlled trials have shown both benefit and harm from tight blood-glucose control in patients in the intensive care unit (ICU). Variation in the use of early parenteral nutrition and in insulin-induced severe hypoglycemia might explain this inconsistency. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients, on ICU admission, to liberal glucose control (insulin initiated only when the blood-glucose level was >215 mg per deciliter [>11.9 mmol per liter]) or to tight glucose control (blood-glucose level targeted with the use of the LOGIC-Insulin algorithm at 80 to 110 mg per deciliter [4.4 to 6.1 mmol per liter]); parenteral nutrition was withheld in both groups for 1 week. Protocol adherence was determined according to glucose metrics. The primary outcome was the length of time that ICU care was needed, calculated on the basis of time to discharge alive from the ICU, with death accounted for as a competing risk; 90-day mortality was the safety outcome. RESULTS: Of 9230 patients who underwent randomization, 4622 were assigned to liberal glucose control and 4608 to tight glucose control. The median morning blood-glucose level was 140 mg per deciliter (interquartile range, 122 to 161) with liberal glucose control and 107 mg per deciliter (interquartile range, 98 to 117) with tight glucose control. Severe hypoglycemia occurred in 31 patients (0.7%) in the liberal-control group and 47 patients (1.0%) in the tight-control group. The length of time that ICU care was needed was similar in the two groups (hazard ratio for earlier discharge alive with tight glucose control, 1.00; 95% confidence interval, 0.96 to 1.04; P = 0.94). Mortality at 90 days was also similar (10.1% with liberal glucose control and 10.5% with tight glucose control, P = 0.51). Analyses of eight prespecified secondary outcomes suggested that the incidence of new infections, the duration of respiratory and hemodynamic support, the time to discharge alive from the hospital, and mortality in the ICU and hospital were similar in the two groups, whereas severe acute kidney injury and cholestatic liver dysfunction appeared less prevalent with tight glucose control. CONCLUSIONS: In critically ill patients who were not receiving early parenteral nutrition, tight glucose control did not affect the length of time that ICU care was needed or mortality. (Funded by the Research Foundation-Flanders and others; TGC-Fast ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03665207.).

Incidence, predictors and vascular sequelae of distal limb ischemia in minimally invasive cardiac surgery with femoral artery cannulation: an observational cohort study.

Literature regarding monitoring and consequences of distal limb ischemia due to femoral artery cannulation for Minimally Invasive Cardiac Surgery (MICS) remains limited. The primary objective was to determine its incidence, defined as a ≥ 15% difference in regional Oxygen Saturation (rSO2) lasting ≥ four consecutive minutes between the cannulated and non-cannulated limb. The secondary objectives included: determination of distal limb ischemia, defined as a Tissue Oxygenation Index (TOI) < 50% in the cannulated limb, identification of predictors for distal limb ischemia, determination of a possible association of NIRS-diagnosed ischemia with acute kidney injury, and the need for vascular surgery up to six months after cardiac surgery. A prospective, observational cohort study with blinded rSO2-measurements to prevent intraoperative clinical decision-making. A single-center, community-hospital, clinical study. All consecutive patients ≥ 18 years old, and scheduled for predefined MICS. Patients underwent MICS with bilateral calf muscle rSO2-measurements conducted by Near-Infrared Spectroscopy (NIRS). In total 75/280 patients (26.79%) experienced distal limb ischemia according to the primary objective, while 18/280 patients (6.42%) experienced distal limb ischemia according to the secondary objective. Multivariate logistic regression showed younger age to be an independent predictor for distal limb ischemia (p = 0.003). None of the patients who suffered intraoperative ischemia required vascular surgery within the follow-up period. The incidence of NIRS-diagnosed ischemia varied from 6.4% to 26.8% depending on the used criteria. Short and long-term vascular sequelae, however, are limited and not intraoperative ischemia related. The added value of intraoperative distal limb NIRS monitoring for vascular reasons seems limited. Future research on femoral artery cannulation in MICS should shift focus to other outcome parameters such as acute kidney injury, postoperative pain or paresthesias.

Additive or synergistic analgesic effect of metamizole on standard pain treatment at home after arthroscopic shoulder surgery: A randomised controlled superiority trial.

BACKGROUND: There is growing evidence that the analgesic effect of metamizole is mediated at least partly by central mechanisms, including the endocannabinoid/endovanilloid system. Consequently, metamizole may have additive or even synergistic analgesic effects with paracetamol and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID). OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess if triple therapy with metamizole, ibuprofen and paracetamol (MIP) is superior to double therapy with ibuprofen and paracetamol (i.p.) in treating pain at home after ambulatory arthroscopic shoulder surgery. DESIGN/SETTING/PATIENTS/INTERVENTION: In this double-blind, controlled, high-volume single centre, superiority trial, 110 patients undergoing elective ambulatory arthroscopic shoulder surgery were randomised to receive either MIP ( n  = 55) or i.p. ( n  = 55) orally for 4 days between December 2019 and November 2021. Pain intensity at movement and rest, using a numeric rating scale (NRS), perceived pain relief, use of rescue medication and adverse effects of study medication were recorded at the post-anaesthesia care unit (PACU) and on postoperative day (POD) 1 to 4 and 7. Quality of Recovery (QoR) and satisfaction with study medication were measured at POD 7 with telephone follow-up. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The primary outcome measure was postoperative pain intensity on movement measured by an 11-point NRS (where 0 = no pain and 10 = worst pain imaginable) on POD 1. RESULTS: For the primary outcome, superiority of MIP in reducing postoperative pain at movement on POD 1 was not confirmed: mean difference NRS [95% confidence interval (CI), -0.08 (-1.00 to 0.84)]. For pain on movement and at rest, no significant differences were found between groups in the PACU nor on POD 1 to 4 or day 7. Nausea was reported significantly more frequently in the metamizole group (22.6 vs. 58.5; P  < 0.001). Other adverse effects of study medication, rescue opioid consumption, perceived pain relief, QoR at POD 7, and overall patient satisfaction were similar in both groups. CONCLUSION: Clinically, triple oral treatment with metamizole, paracetamol and ibuprofen is not superior to oral paracetamol and ibuprofen in multimodal pain treatment at home after ambulatory arthroscopic shoulder surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: European Union Clinical Trials Register 2019-002801-23 and Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04082728.

Differences and Similarities Among COVID-19 Patients Treated in Seven ICUs in Three Countries Within One Region: An Observational Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate healthcare system-driven variation in general characteristics, interventions, and outcomes in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients admitted to the ICU within one Western European region across three countries. DESIGN: Multicenter observational cohort study. SETTING: Seven ICUs in the Euregio Meuse-Rhine, one region across Belgium, The Netherlands, and Germany. PATIENTS: Consecutive COVID-19 patients supported in the ICU during the first pandemic wave. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics, laboratory values, and outcome data were retrieved after ethical approval and data-sharing agreements. Descriptive statistics were performed to investigate country-related practice variation. From March 2, 2020, to August 12, 2020, 551 patients were admitted. Mean age was 65.4 ± 11.2 years, and 29% were female. At admission, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II scores were 15.0 ± 5.5, 16.8 ± 5.5, and 15.8 ± 5.3 (p = 0.002), and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores were 4.4 ± 2.7, 7.4 ± 2.2, and 7.7 ± 3.2 (p < 0.001) in the Belgian, Dutch, and German parts of Euregio, respectively. The ICU mortality rate was 22%, 42%, and 44%, respectively (p < 0.001). Large differences were observed in the frequency of organ support, antimicrobial/inflammatory therapy application, and ICU capacity. Mixed-multivariable logistic regression analyses showed that differences in ICU mortality were independent of age, sex, disease severity, comorbidities, support strategies, therapies, and complications. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 patients admitted to ICUs within one region, the Euregio Meuse-Rhine, differed significantly in general characteristics, applied interventions, and outcomes despite presumed genetic and socioeconomic background, admission diagnosis, access to international literature, and data collection are similar. Variances in healthcare systems' organization, particularly ICU capacity and admission criteria, combined with a rapidly spreading pandemic might be important drivers for the observed differences. Heterogeneity between patient groups but also healthcare systems should be presumed to interfere with outcomes in coronavirus disease 2019.

Secondary infection in COVID-19 critically ill patients: a retrospective single-center evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Patients infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) can develop severe illness necessitating intensive care admission. Critically ill patients are susceptible for the development of secondary bacterial infections. Due to a combination of virus- and drug-induced immunosuppression, critically ill patients with corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may even have a higher risk of developing a secondary infection. These secondary infections can aggravate the severity of illness and increase the risk of death. Further research on secondary infections in COVID-19 patients is essential. Therefore, the objective of this study was to investigate the incidence and associated risk factors of secondary bacterial infections and to identify the most common groups of pathogens in critically ill COVID-19 patients. METHODS: This mono-center, retrospective observational cohort study was performed at the intensive care unit (ICU) of the Jessa Hospital, Hasselt, Belgium. All adult COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU from 13th March 2020 until 17th October 2020, were eligible for inclusion in the study. Data from the resulting 116 patients were prospectively entered into a customized database. The resulting database was retrospectively reviewed to investigate three types of secondary bacterial infections (secondary pneumonia, bloodstream infections of unknown origin, catheter-related sepsis). RESULTS: Of 94 included patients, 68% acquired at least one of the studied secondary bacterial infections during their ICU stay. Almost two thirds of patients (65.96%, n = 62) acquired a secondary pneumonia, whereas 29.79% (n = 28) acquired a bacteremia of unknown origin and a smaller proportion of patients (14.89%, n = 14) acquired a catheter-related sepsis. Male gender (P = 0.05), diabetes mellitus (P = 0.03) and the cumulative dose of corticosteroids (P = 0.004) were associated with increased risk of secondary bacterial infection. The most common pathogens detected in the cultures of patients with secondary pneumonia were Gram-negative bacilli. Bacteremia of unknown origin and catheter-related sepsis were mostly caused by Gram-positive cocci. CONCLUSION: This study confirms that the incidence of secondary bacterial infections is very high in critically ill COVID-19 patients. These patients are at highest risk of developing secondary pneumonia. Male gender, a history of diabetes mellitus and the administration of corticosteroids were associated with increased risk of secondary bacterial infection.

Acute kidney injury in critical COVID-19: a multicenter cohort analysis in seven large hospitals in Belgium.

BACKGROUND: Acute kidney injury (AKI) has been reported as a frequent complication of critical COVID-19. We aimed to evaluate the occurrence of AKI and use of kidney replacement therapy (KRT) in critical COVID-19, to assess patient and kidney outcomes and risk factors for AKI and differences in outcome when the diagnosis of AKI is based on urine output (UO) or on serum creatinine (sCr). METHODS: Multicenter, retrospective cohort analysis of patients with critical COVID-19 in seven large hospitals in Belgium. AKI was defined according to KDIGO within 21 days after ICU admission. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to explore the risk factors for developing AKI and to assess the association between AKI and ICU mortality. RESULTS: Of 1286 patients, 85.1% had AKI, and KRT was used in 9.8%. Older age, obesity, a higher APACHE II score and use of mechanical ventilation at day 1 of ICU stay were associated with an increased risk for AKI. After multivariable adjustment, all AKI stages were associated with ICU mortality. AKI was based on sCr in 40.1% and UO in 81.5% of patients. All AKI stages based on sCr and AKI stage 3 based on UO were associated with ICU mortality. Persistent AKI was present in 88.6% and acute kidney disease (AKD) in 87.6%. Rapid reversal of AKI yielded a better prognosis compared to persistent AKI and AKD. Kidney recovery was observed in 47.4% of surviving AKI patients. CONCLUSIONS: Over 80% of critically ill COVID-19 patients had AKI. This was driven by the high occurrence rate of AKI defined by UO criteria. All AKI stages were associated with mortality (NCT04997915).

Predictors of poor outcome in critically ill patients with COVID-19 pneumonia treated with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

INTRODUCTION: We aimed to identify risk factors associated with ICU mortality in critically ill patients with COVID-19 pneumonia treated with Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). We also aimed to assess protocol violations of the local eligibility criteria of ECMO initiation. METHODS: All 31 consecutive adult patients with confirmed COVID-19 pneumonia admitted to ICU and treated with ECMO from March 13th 2020 to 8 December 2021 were enrolled. Eligibility criteria for ECMO initiation were: P/F-ratio<50 mmHg >3 hours, P/F-ratio<80 mmHg >6 hours or pH<7.25 + PaCO2>60 mmHg >6 hours, despite maximal protective invasive ventilation. Primary outcome was ICU mortality. Univariate logistic regression analyses were performed to identify predictors of ICU mortality. RESULTS: 12 out of 31 patients (38.7%) did not survive ECMO treatment in ICU. Half of the non-survivors suffered from acute kidney failure compared to 3 out of 19 survivors (15.79%) (p = .04). Half of the non-survivors required CRRT treatment versus 1 patient in the survivor group (5.3%) (p < .01). Higher age (2.45 (0.97-6.18), p = .05), the development of AKI (5.33 (1.00-28.43), p = .05), need of CRRT during ICU stay (18.00 (1.79-181.31), p = .01) and major bleeding during ECMO therapy (0.51 (0.19-0.89), p < .01) were identified to be predictors of ICU mortality. CONCLUSION: Almost 60% of patients could be treated successfully with ECMO with sustained results at 3 months. Predictors for ICU mortality were development of AKI and need of CRRT during ICU stay, higher age category and major bleeding. Inadvertent ECMO allocation was noted in almost one in five patients.

Risk factors for mortality in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 at the start of the pandemic in Belgium: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Belgium was among the first countries in Europe with confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases. Since the first diagnosis on February 3rd, the epidemic has quickly evolved, with Belgium at the crossroads of Europe, being one of the hardest hit countries. Although risk factors for severe disease in COVID-19 patients have been described in Chinese and United States (US) cohorts, good quality studies reporting on clinical characteristics, risk factors and outcome of European COVID-19 patients are still scarce. METHODS: This study describes the clinical characteristics, complications and outcomes of 319 hospitalized COVID-19 patients, admitted to a tertiary care center at the start of the pandemic in Belgium, and aims to identify the main risk factors for in-hospital mortality in a European context using univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Most patients were male (60%), the median age was 74 (IQR 61-83) and 20% of patients were admitted to the intensive care unit, of whom 63% needed invasive mechanical ventilation. The overall case fatality rate was 25%. The best predictors of in-hospital mortality in multivariate analysis were older age, and renal insufficiency, higher lactate dehydrogenase and thrombocytopenia. Patients admitted early in the epidemic had a higher mortality compared to patients admitted later in the epidemic. In univariate analysis, patients with obesity did have an overall increased risk of death, while overweight on the other hand showed a trend towards lower mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients hospitalized with COVID-19 during the first weeks of the epidemic in Belgium were admitted with severe disease and the overall case fatality rate was high. The identified risk factors for mortality are not easily amenable at short term, underscoring the lasting need of effective therapeutic and preventative measures.

Metamizole vs. ibuprofen at home after day case surgery: A double-blind randomised controlled noninferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: NSAIDs and paracetamol are the cornerstones of pain treatment after day case surgery. However, NSAIDs have numerous contraindications and consequently are not suitable in up to 25% of patients. Metamizole is a non-opioid compound with a favourable gastro-intestinal and cardiovascular profile compared with NSAIDs. OBJECTIVES: The study aimed to assess if a combination of metamizole and paracetamol is noninferior to a combination of ibuprofen and paracetamol in treating pain at home after painful day case surgery. DESIGN: A double-blind randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Single centre. PATIENTS: Two hundred patients undergoing elective ambulatory haemorrhoid surgery, arthroscopic shoulder or knee surgery, or inguinal hernia repair. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomly allocated to receive either metamizole and paracetamol (n = 100) or ibuprofen and paracetamol (n = 100) orally for four days. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Average postoperative pain intensity using a numerical rating scale and use of rescue medication were measured in the postanaesthesia care unit (PACU) and on postoperative days (POD) 1 to 3. A difference in mean numerical rating scale score of 1 point or less was considered noninferior. Adverse effects of study medication and satisfaction with study medication were measured on PODs 1 to 3 by telephone follow-up. RESULTS: In the PACU, the difference in mean ±â€ŠSD pain score between metamizole and paracetamol and ibuprofen and paracetamol was 0.85 ±â€Š0.78. From POD 1 to 3, this difference was lower than 1, resulting in noninferiority. Rescue opioid consumption in the PACU and on PODs 1 and 3 was not significantly different between treatment groups. Rescue opioid consumption on POD2 was significantly higher in the ibuprofen and paracetamol group (P = 0.042). Adverse effects of study medication and overall patient satisfaction were similar in both groups. CONCLUSION: Paracetamol/metamizole and paracetamol/ibuprofen are equally effective in treatment of acute postoperative pain at home after ambulatory surgery with comparable patient satisfaction levels. TRIAL REGISTRATION: European Union Clinical Trials Register 2015-003987-35.

The analgesic efficacy of intravenous regional anesthesia with a forearm versus conventional upper arm tourniquet: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The main objective of this review is to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the existing evidence related to the analgesic efficacy with the use of conventional, upper arm intravenous regional anesthesia (IVRA) as compared to a modified, forearm IVRA in adult patients undergoing procedures on the distal upper extremity. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL (Cochrane) databases were searched for randomized controlled trials published in English, French, Dutch, German or Spanish language. Primary outcomes of interest including description of quality level of anesthesia and onset of sensory block were assessed for this review. Dosage of the local anesthetic, local anesthetic toxicity and need for sedation due to tourniquet pain were considered as secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Our literature search yielded 3 papers for qualitative synthesis. Four other articles were added into a parallel analysis of 7 reports that provided data on the incidence of complications and success rate after forearm IVRA. Forearm IVRA was found to be as efficient as upper arm IVRA (RR = 0.98 [0.93, 1.05], P = 0.78), but comes with the advantage of a lower need for sedation due to less tourniquet pain. CONCLUSION: Our results demonstrate that forearm IVRA is as effective in providing a surgical block as compared to a conventional upper arm IVRA, even with a reduced, non-toxic dosage of local anesthetic. No severe complications were associated with the use of a forearm IVRA. Other benefits of the modified technique include a faster onset of sensory block, better tourniquet tolerance and a dryer surgical field. REGISTRATION OF THE SYSTEMATIC REVIEW: A review protocol was published in the PROSPERO register in November 2015 with registration number CRD42015029536 .

Prevalence and Predictors of Patient Nonadherence to Pharmacological Acute Pain Therapy at Home After Day Surgery: A Prospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Good adherence to prescribed analgesics can be crucial to suppress or even prevent acute postoperative pain after day surgery. The aim of this study was to analyze prevalence and predictors of analgesic nonadherence after day surgery. METHODS: Elective patients scheduled for day surgery were prospectively enrolled from November 2008 to April 2010. Outcome parameters were measured by using questionnaire packages at 2 time points: 1 week preoperatively and 4 days postoperatively. The primary outcome parameter was analgesic nonadherence. Adherence was defined according to the patient's response to the questionnaire item "analgesia use as prescribed": full adherence, "yes"; partial adherence, "yes, sometimes"; nonadherence, "no." Bivariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to identify predictors of analgesic nonadherence. RESULTS: A total of 1,248 patients were included. The prevalence rates of analgesic nonadherence and partial adherence were 21.6% and 20.0%, respectively, in the total study population but dropped to 9.4% and 19.8%, respectively, in patients with moderate to severe pain. Low postoperative pain intensity and short duration of surgery were the most important predictors of analgesic nonadherence. The most important preoperative predictors for analgesic nonadherence were low preoperative pain intensity, low preoperative expectations of pain, and low fear of short-term effects of surgery. CONCLUSION: Analgesic nonadherence and partial adherence are common after day surgery but decrease as average pain intensity increases. Patients at risk for analgesic nonadherence can be identified during the preoperative period based on preoperative pain intensity, preoperative expectations of pain, and fear of surgery.

Controlled-release oxycodone versus naproxen at home after ambulatory surgery: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Strong opioids in the home setting after ambulatory surgery have rarely been studied for fear of hazardous adverse effects such as respiratory depression. OBJECTIVES: We compared the efficacy of paracetamol/controlled-release (CR) oxycodone and paracetamol/naproxen for treatment of acute postoperative pain at home after ambulatory surgery. Secondary outcomes were adverse effects of study medication, treatment satisfaction, and postoperative analgesic compliance. METHODS: Patients undergoing ambulatory knee arthroscopy or inguinal hernia repair surgery (n = 105) were randomized into 3 groups: Group1 paracetamol/naproxen (n = 35), Group 2 paracetamol/CR oxycodone for 24 hours (n = 35), and Group 3 paracetamol/CR oxycodone for 48 hours (n = 35). Pain intensity at movement and at rest using a visual analog scale as well as satisfaction with postoperative analgesia and side effects were recorded for up to 48 hours postoperatively. Compliance with study medication was also assessed. RESULTS: For pain at movement and at rest, no significant differences were found between the paracetamol/naproxen group and either the paracetamol/CR oxycodone for 24 hours group (ß = 2.6 [4.9]; P = 0.597) or the paracetamol/CR oxycodone for 48 hours (ß = -1.7 [5.1]; P = 0.736). No major adverse effects of study medication were registered and satisfaction with postoperative pain treatment was high in all groups. Compliance was comparable across the groups. Despite clear instructions, 8 patients with the lowest pain scores did not use any of the prescribed pain medication. CONCLUSIONS: Paracetamol/CR oxycodone and paracetamol/naproxen are equally effective in treatment of acute postoperative pain at home after ambulatory surgery with comparable patient satisfaction level. We suggest paracetamol/CR oxycodone to be a valuable alternative for the current paracetamol/naproxen gold standard, particularly in patients with a contraindication for nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02152592.

Axillary Brachial Plexus Block Compared with Other Regional Anesthesia Techniques in Distal Upper Limb Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Background: Several regional anesthesia (RA) techniques have been described for distal upper limb surgery. However, the best approach in terms of RA block success rate and safety is not well recognized. Objective: To assess and compare the surgical anesthesia and efficacy of axillary brachial plexus block with other RA techniques for hand and wrist surgery. The attainment of adequate surgical anesthesia 30 min after block placement was considered a primary outcome measure. Additionally, successful block outcomes were required without the use of supplemental local anesthetic injection, systemic opioid analgesia, or the need to convert to general anesthesia. Methods: We performed a systematic search in the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and CENTRAL. RCTs comparing axillary blocks with other brachial plexus block techniques, distal peripheral forearm nerve block, intravenous RA, and the wide-awake local anesthesia no tourniquet (WALANT) technique were included. Results: In total, 3070 records were reviewed, of which 28 met the inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis of adequate surgical anesthesia showed no significant difference between ultrasound-guided axillary block and supraclavicular block (RR: 0.94 [0.89, 1.00]; p = 0.06; I2 = 60.00%), but a statistically significant difference between ultrasound-guided axillary block and infraclavicular block (RR: 0.92 [0.88, 0.97]; p < 0.01; I2 = 53.00%). Ultrasound-guided infraclavicular blocks were performed faster than ultrasound-guided axillary blocks (SMD: 0.74 [0.30, 1.17]; p < 0.001; I2 = 85.00%). No differences in performance time between ultrasound-guided axillary and supraclavicular blocks were demonstrated. Additionally, adequate surgical anesthesia onset time was not significantly different between ultrasound-guided block approaches: ultrasound-guided axillary blocks versus ultrasound-guided supraclavicular blocks (SMD: 0.52 [-0.14, 1.17]; p = 0.12; I2 = 86.00%); ultrasound-guided axillary blocks versus ultrasound-guided infraclavicular blocks (SMD: 0.21 [-0.49, 0.91]; p = 0.55; I2 = 92.00%). Conclusions: The RA choice should be individualized depending on the patient, procedure, and operator-specific parameters. Compared to ultrasound-guided supraclavicular and infraclavicular block, ultrasound-guided axillary block may be preferred for patients with significant concerns of block-related side effects/complications. High heterogeneity between studies shows the need for more robust RCTs.

Efficacy of Alkaline Phosphatase in Critically Ill Patients with COVID-19: A Multicentre Investigator-Initiated Double-Blind Randomised Placebo-Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Efforts to identify therapies to treat hospitalised patients with COVID-19 are being continued. Alkaline phosphatase (AP) dephosphorylates pro-inflammatory adenosine triphosphate (ATP) into anti-inflammatory adenosine. METHODS: In a randomised controlled trial, we investigated the safety and efficacy of AP in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection admitted to the ICU. AP or a placebo was administered for four days following admission to the ICU. The primary outcome was the duration of mechanical ventilation. Mortality in 28 days, acute kidney injury, need for reintubation, safety, and inflammatory markers relevant to the described high cytokine release associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection were the secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Between December 2020 and March 2022, 97 patients (of the intended 132) were included, of which 51 were randomised to AP. The trial was terminated prematurely based on meeting the threshold for futility. Compared to the placebo, AP did not affect the duration of mechanical ventilation (9.0 days vs. 9.3 days, p = 1.0). No safety issues were observed. After 28 days, mortality was 9 (18%) in the AP group versus 6 (13%) in the placebo group (p = 0.531). Additionally, no statistically significant differences between the AP and the placebo were observed for the other secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Alkaline phosphatase (AP) therapy in COVID-19 ICU patients showed no significant benefits in this trial.

Regional anaesthesia for ambulatory surgery.

Regional anaesthesia (RA) has an important and ever-expanding role in ambulatory surgery. Specific practices vary depending on the preferences and resources of the anaesthesia team and hospital setting. It is used for various purposes, including as primary anaesthetic technique for surgery but also as postoperative analgesic modality. The limited duration of action of currently available local anaesthetics limits their application in postoperative pain control and enhanced recovery. The search for the holy grail of regional anaesthetics continues. Current evidence suggests that a peripheral nerve block performed with long-acting local anaesthetics in combination with intravenous or perineural dexamethasone gives the longest and most optimal sensory block. In this review, we outline some possible blocks for ambulatory surgery and additives to perform RA. Moreover, we give an update on local anaesthesia drugs and adjuvants, paediatric RA in ambulatory care and discuss the impact of RA by COVID-19.