RESUMEN
Purpose: Assess the efficacy and safety of valproic acid (VPA) for delirium and agitation in the intensive care unit (ICU) as compared to the use of other antipsychotics. Materials and Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of patients treated for delirium and agitation in the ICU. Patients were included if they had a Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale ≥2 and Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU positive. Patients were split into two groups based on their VPA exposure. The primary outcome was delirium free days. Secondary outcomes included agitation free days, ICU length of stay (LOS), mechanical ventilation duration, and mortality. Results: One hundred eight patients were included, 49 patients in the VPA group and 59 patients in the control group. Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. There was no significant difference in the primary outcome (difference -.15, 95% CI: 0.63-.93, P = .70). There were no significant differences in agitation-free days, mortality, mechanical ventilation duration, or ICU LOS. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that VPA is associated with similar delirium and agitation-free days compared to other non-VPA medications, with some adverse effects. Larger prospective studies are needed to validate the routine use of VPA in this setting.
RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Continuous intravenous unfractionated heparin (UFH) is a mainstay of therapeutic anticoagulation in the acute setting. The two most common laboratory tests for monitoring UFH are the activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) and antifactor Xa (anti-Xa) heparin assay. We reviewed the available evidence to evaluate if the choice of monitoring test for UFH therapy is associated with a difference in the clinical outcomes of bleeding, thrombosis, or mortality. MATERIALS AND METHODS: MEDLINE, Cochrane database, and conference abstracts from the Society of Critical Care Medicine, the American Society of Hematology, and the American College of Clinical Pharmacy were searched for all studies comparing aPTT and anti-Xa monitoring for therapeutic UFH that evaluated outcomes for bleeding, thrombotic events, or mortality. Risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool and Newcastle Ottawa Scale. Pooled relative risk ratios were calculated using an inverse variance-weighted random-effects model. RESULTS: Ten studies (n = 6677) were included for analysis. The use of anti-Xa compared to aPTT was not associated with an increased risk of bleeding (RR 1.03; 95% CI 0.8-1.22 I2 = 4%) or an increased risk of thrombotic events (RR 0.99; 95% CI 0.76-1.30, I2 = 3%). There was no difference in mortality within individual studies but the data were not suitable for pooled analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Pooled data comparing aPTT vs. anti-Xa for monitoring therapeutic UFH did not suggest differences in the outcomes of bleeding or thrombosis.
Asunto(s)
Heparina , Heparina/efectos adversos , Humanos , Tiempo de Tromboplastina ParcialRESUMEN
PURPOSE: To determine the impact of a pharmacist-driven methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) nasal polymerase chain reaction (PCR) screen on vancomycin duration in critically ill patients with suspected pneumonia. METHODS: This was a retrospective, quasi-experimental study at a 613-bed academic medical center with 67 intensive care beds. Adult patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) between 2017 and 2019 for 24 hours or longer and empirically started on intravenous vancomycin for pneumonia were included. The primary intervention was the implementation of a MRSA nasal PCR screen protocol. The primary outcome was duration of empiric vancomycin therapy. Secondary outcomes included the rate of acute kidney injury (AKI), the number of vancomycin levels obtained, the rate of resumption of vancomycin for treatment of pneumonia, ICU length of stay, hospital length of stay, the rate of ICU readmission, and the rate of in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: A total of 418 patients were included in the final analysis. The median vancomycin duration was 2.59 days in the preprotocol group and 1.44 days in the postprotocol group, a reduction of approximately 1.00 day (P < 0.01). There were significantly fewer vancomycin levels measured in the postprotocol group than in the preprotocol group. Secondary outcomes were similar between the 2 groups, except that there was a lower rate of AKI and fewer vancomycin levels obtained in the postprotocol group (despite implementation of area under the curve-based vancomycin dosing) as compared to the preprotocol group. CONCLUSION: The implementation of a pharmacist-driven MRSA nasal PCR screen was associated with a decrease in vancomycin duration and the number of vancomycin levels obtained in critically ill patients with suspected pneumonia.