Recommendations for the management of critically ill patients with COVID-19 in Intensive Care Units.

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to the admission of a high number of patients to the ICU, generally due to severe respiratory failure. Since the appearance of the first cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection, at the end of 2019, in China, a huge number of treatment recommendations for this entity have been published, not always supported by sufficient scientific evidence or with methodological rigor necessary. Thanks to the efforts of different groups of researchers, we currently have the results of clinical trials, and other types of studies, of higher quality. We consider it necessary to create a document that includes recommendations that collect this evidence regarding the diagnosis and treatment of COVID-19, but also aspects that other guidelines have not considered and that we consider essential in the management of critical patients with COVID-19. For this, a drafting committee has been created, made up of members of the SEMICYUC Working Groups more directly related to different specific aspects of the management of these patients.

[Recommendations for the management of critically ill patients with COVID-19 in Intensive Care Units]. / Recomendaciones para el manejo de los pacientes críticos con COVID-19 en las Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos.

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to the admission of a high number of patients to the ICU, generally due to severe respiratory failure. Since the appearance of the first cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection, at the end of 2019, in China, a huge number of treatment recommendations for this entity have been published, not always supported by sufficient scientific evidence or with methodological rigor necessary. Thanks to the efforts of different groups of researchers, we currently have the results of clinical trials, and other types of studies, of higher quality. We consider it necessary to create a document that includes recommendations that collect this evidence regarding the diagnosis and treatment of COVID-19, but also aspects that other guidelines have not considered and that we consider essential in the management of critical patients with COVID-19. For this, a drafting committee has been created, made up of members of the SEMICYUC Working Groups more directly related to different specific aspects of the management of these patients.

[APACHE II and SAPS II as predictors of brain death development in neurocritical care patients]. / APACHE II y SAPS II como predictores de evolucion a muerte encefalica en pacientes neurocriticos.

AIM: To assess the prognostic value of APACHE II and SAPS II scales to predict brain death evolution of neurocritical care patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Retrospective observational study performed in a tertiary hospital. Include 508 patients over 16 years old, hospitalized in ICU for at least 24 hours. The variables of interest were: demographic data, risk factors, APACHE II, SAPS II and outcome. RESULTS: Median age: 41 years old (IR: 25-57). Males: 76.2%. Most frequent reason for admission: trauma (55.3%). Medians: Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS), 10 points; APACHE II, 13 points; SAPS II, 31 points; and ICU stay, 5 days. Mortality in the ICU was 28.5% (n = 145) of whom 44 (8.7%) evolved to brain death. Univariate logistic regression analysis showed that GCS, APACHE II and SAPS II scores, as well as ICU stay days behaved as predictors of brain death evolution. However, the multivariate analysis performed including APACHE II and SAPS II scores showed that only APACHE II maintained statistical significance, despite the good discrimination of both scores. CONCLUSION: Transplant coordinators might use the APACHE II score as a tool to detect patients at risk of progression to brain death, minimizing the loss of potential donors.

TITLE: APACHE II y SAPS II como predictores de evolucion a muerte encefalica en pacientes neurocriticos.Objetivo. Evaluar si las escalas pronosticas APACHE II (Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II) y SAPS II (Simplified Acute Physiology Score II) son capaces de predecir la evolucion a muerte encefalica en pacientes neurocriticos. Pacientes y metodos. Estudio retrospectivo, observacional, realizado en un hospital de tercer nivel. Se incluyo a 508 pacientes mayores de 16 años, ingresados con patologia neurocritica aguda, con estancia en la unidad de cuidados intensivos de al menos 24 horas. Las variables de interes fueron: datos demograficos, factores de riesgo, APACHE II, SAPS II y resultado pronostico. Resultados. Mediana de edad: 41 años (rango intercuartilico: 25-57). Varones: 76,2%. Motivo de ingreso mas frecuente: traumatismo (55,3%). Medianas: escala de coma de Glasgow (GCS), 10 puntos; APACHE II, 13 puntos; SAPS II, 31 puntos; y estancia en cuidados intensivos, cinco dias. La mortalidad en la unidad de cuidados intensivos fue de 145 (28,5%). De ellos, 44 (8,7%) evolucionaron a muerte encefalica. El analisis de regresion logistica univariante mostro que la GCS, las escalas APACHE II y SAPS II, y los dias de estancia en la unidad de cuidados intensivos se comportaron como variables predictoras de evolucion a muerte encefalica. Sin embargo, en el analisis multivariante realizado con APACHE II y SAPS II, se evidencio que solo APACHE II mantiene significacion estadistica, a pesar de la buena discriminacion de ambas escalas. Conclusion. Los coordinadores de trasplantes podrian usar la escala APACHE II como una herramienta para detectar pacientes con riesgo de evolucion a muerte encefalica, minimizando la perdida de potenciales donantes.

Short-term Results From a Training Program to Improve Organ Donation in Uncontrolled Donation After Circulatory Death.

BACKGROUND: In all organ transplantation programs, election of the proper protocol relies primarily on the professionals involved in the detection of potential donors. The objective of our study was to assess the impact of a series of prehospital training sessions, as well as to develop several positive feedback strategies within the uncontrolled organ donation after circulatory death (uDCD) program in our city. METHODS: A before-after intervention study was carried out in 3 steps. First, professionals enrolled in the Emergency Health Services Agency-061 (EPES-061) program underwent specific training to identify potential donors. Second, a specific logotype was designed to alert emergency health care professionals that in cases where cardiopulmonary resuscitation was ineffective and after treatment of all potentially reversible causes, the "chain of survival" should be considered a "chain of opportunities." Third, a positive feedback strategy was put in place, whereby each time a donation was procured, the EPES-061 personnel that had identified the potential donor were notified by phone and in a personal letter. RESULTS: The mean age for donors was 50.5 years of age (interquartile range 37-52.5), and 89.5% of all donations came from male subjects. Positive feedback letters and phone calls, including information on final outcome, were provided to the appropriate personnel in 100% of the cases. Postintervention information showed an increase in both eligible and utilized donors. CONCLUSIONS: Interventions outside the hospital setting that facilitate optimal implementation of the uDCD program are an essential part of this strategy to increase the donor pool and make the wait shorter for transplant patients.

Postoperative Care in Kidney Transplantation: A Comparison Between Controlled and Uncontrolled Donation After Circulatory Death.

Recent research in kidney transplantation has revealed differences in the evolution of renal function among patients transplanted from 2 alternative programs for donation after circulatory death (DCD). A retrospective, observational, single-center study was carried out from 2013 to 2016 at a level III hospital intensive care unit (ICU) to assess the progression of kidney recipients after transplants from uncontrolled DCD (uDCD) or controlled DCD (cDCD). The following variables were collected for data analysis: demographics, comorbidities, type of donation, lactate, hemoglobin and glucose levels at ICU admission, creatinine concentration at ICU admission, at-hospital ward transfer, at-hospital discharge, radioisotope imaging results, ICU and in-hospital length of stay, and mortality. There were 87 patients eligible for analysis, 42.5% of which were uDCD recipients. Improvement in kidney function was significantly delayed after uDCD compared with cDCD. A multivariate analysis showed that both uDCD and lactate levels at ICU admission increase the risk of poor outcome after renal transplantation. No deaths were registered in either patient group. Our results suggest that kidney transplantation recipients from uDCD recover renal function at a slower rate than patients transplanted from cDCD, a factor that does not affect mortality.

Results of Controlled Donation After Circulatory Death in a Third-Level Hospital.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the characteristics and evolution of controlled donation after circulatory death (DCD) type III. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Observational and retrospective study of controlled DCD type III of donors conducted from 2014 to 2016. Clinical data, intensive care unit (ICU) stay, cause of death, warm ischemia time, and total time were collected. Delayed graft function (DGF) and survival of renal transplant were also registered. Qualitative variables are described as frequencies and absolute values and quantitative variables as medians and interquartile ranges. RESULTS: A total of 21 donors were collected; 71% (15) were males, median age was 55 years (interquartile range [IR] 48-72), and median ICU stay was 7 days (IR 4-12). The main cause of death was anoxic encephalopathy (57%, 12), followed by intracerebral hemorrhage (28%, 6). In 48%, withdrawal of life support occurred in the operating room, and 98% of donors were preserved by abdominal super-rapid cannulation technique. Average warm ischemia time was 20 minutes (IR 16-24), and total ischemia time was 26 minutes (IR 23-34). Of the donations, 57% were livers and 90% were kidneys. Out of 42 kidneys donated, 54% (23) of them were valid. Median renal transplant hospital stay was 18 days (IR 6-24), and 46% develop DGF. Survival at discharge was 100%. CONCLUSION: DCD type III ensures a source of organs. The main cause of death was anoxic encephalopathy. Most donors were able to donate some solid organ.

Living Donor in Renal Transplantation: Minimizing Risks.

In recent years, the broadening of indications for renal transplantation, together with the progressive reduction of donations following brain stem death, has led to living donation being considered in increasing numbers of cases for renal transplantation. To investigate this further, it is necessary to assess the impact it has on the postoperative outcomes in the intensive care unit (ICU). Our group conducted a retrospective, observational, single-center study from 2013 to 2016 to evaluate differences in outcomes between living and cadaveric kidney donation both during ICU admission and total hospitalization. We compared differences in characteristics between living and deceased graft recipients including demographics, comorbidities, analytical data, radioisotope imaging test results, complications, ICU and hospital ward length of stay, and mortality. In all, 387 patients were eligible for analysis, and 13% received living donor grafts. Our results demonstrate that this group had significantly fewer complications, shorter length of hospital stay, and reduced mortality in comparison with recipients of cadaveric donor grafts. The better postoperative outcomes from living donor grafts could result from careful selection of the donor and less inflammatory injury, minimizing risk in the postoperative period.

Cold Ischemia Time as a Factor in Post-transplantation Complications for Orthotopic Hepatic Transplantation.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to compare a shorter cold ischemia time with the present one in relation to the complications developed in liver transplantations. DESIGN: This is a retrospective, observational study of orthotopic liver transplantations performed with grafts from brain-dead donors during 12 months at a University Hospital (Seville). We compare incidence rates of complications (reperfusion syndrome, arterial and biliary complications, and prostaglandin requirements) between two groups according to cold ischemia times (group A < 6 hours; group B > 6 hours). RESULTS: Sixty cases were included. There were more males in both groups as donors (55.5%) and recipients (75%). The median age was higher in group B in two cases. The Model for End-stage Liver Disease score was higher in patients with a shorter cold ischemia time, with a median of 20 hours (range, 16 to 26.5 hours). We observed that reperfusion syndrome (3.4% vs. 13.3%; P = .353), vascular complications (6.9% vs. 24.1%; P = .144), biliary tract complications (13.8% vs. 20.7%; P = .730), and prostaglandin requirements (3.4% vs. 20.7%; P = .102) were more common in group B, although without reaching statistical significance. After uni- and multivariate analyses, cold ischemia time longer than 6 hours was the only risk factor to develop complications (odds ratio: 3.578; 95% confidence interval: 1.125 to 11.374, P = .031). CONCLUSION: According to the results of our analysis, cold ischemia times longer than 6 hours, as tends to be the usual procedure in most centers, imply higher rates of complications after liver transplantation.

Orthotopic Liver Transplantation: Preliminary Analysis of Complications With Grafts From Elderly Donors.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to determine if donor grafts of patients older than 65 years develop more post-transplantation complications than those of younger patients. DESIGN: This is a retrospective, observational study of liver transplant recipients during 12 months in Virgen del Rocio University Hospital. We compare incidence rates of reperfusion syndrome, acute kidney injury, and need for intra- and postoperative red blood cell transfusions in two donor age groups in which group A is <65 years old and group B is ≥65 years old. RESULTS: Sixty cases were included. Reperfusion syndrome, acute kidney injury, and both intra- and postoperative red blood cell transfusion were more frequent in group A than group B (11.4% vs. 4%, P = .390; 44% vs. 32%, P = .423; 68.8% vs. 48%, P = .120; and 70.6% vs. 64%, P = .779, respectively). Six recipients (17.1%) died at 12 months from group A whereas there were no deaths register in group B during that time (P = .036). CONCLUSION: Our results showed that including elderly donors does not aggravate incidence of complications, emphasizing that advanced age should not be an exclusion criteria for liver transplantation.