Continuous vs Intermittent ß-Lactam Antibiotic Infusions in Critically Ill Patients With Sepsis: The BLING III Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Whether ß-lactam antibiotics administered by continuous compared with intermittent infusion reduces the risk of death in patients with sepsis is uncertain. Objective: To evaluate whether continuous vs intermittent infusion of a ß-lactam antibiotic (piperacillin-tazobactam or meropenem) results in decreased all-cause mortality at 90 days in critically ill patients with sepsis. Design, Setting, and Participants: An international, open-label, randomized clinical trial conducted in 104 intensive care units (ICUs) in Australia, Belgium, France, Malaysia, New Zealand, Sweden, and the United Kingdom. Recruitment occurred from March 26, 2018, to January 11, 2023, with follow-up completed on April 12, 2023. Participants were critically ill adults (≥18 years) treated with piperacillin-tazobactam or meropenem for sepsis. Intervention: Eligible patients were randomized to receive an equivalent 24-hour dose of a ß-lactam antibiotic by either continuous (n = 3498) or intermittent (n = 3533) infusion for a clinician-determined duration of treatment or until ICU discharge, whichever occurred first. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was all-cause mortality within 90 days after randomization. Secondary outcomes were clinical cure up to 14 days after randomization; new acquisition, colonization, or infection with a multiresistant organism or Clostridioides difficile infection up to 14 days after randomization; ICU mortality; and in-hospital mortality. Results: Among 7202 randomized participants, 7031 (mean [SD] age, 59 [16] years; 2423 women [35%]) met consent requirements for inclusion in the primary analysis (97.6%). Within 90 days, 864 of 3474 patients (24.9%) assigned to receive continuous infusion had died compared with 939 of 3507 (26.8%) assigned intermittent infusion (absolute difference, -1.9% [95% CI, -4.9% to 1.1%]; odds ratio, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.81 to 1.01]; P = .08). Clinical cure was higher in the continuous vs intermittent infusion group (1930/3467 [55.7%] and 1744/3491 [50.0%], respectively; absolute difference, 5.7% [95% CI, 2.4% to 9.1%]). Other secondary outcomes were not statistically different. Conclusions and Relevance: The observed difference in 90-day mortality between continuous vs intermittent infusions of ß-lactam antibiotics did not meet statistical significance in the primary analysis. However, the confidence interval around the effect estimate includes the possibility of both no important effect and a clinically important benefit in the use of continuous infusions in this group of patients. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03213990.

Patient-important upper gastrointestinal bleeding in the ICU: A mixed-methods study of patient and family perspectives.

INTRODUCTION: The objective of this study was to create a definition of patient-important upper gastrointestinal bleeding during critical illness as an outcome for a randomized trial. DESIGN: This was a sequential mixed-methods qualitative-dominant multi-center study with an instrument-building aim. In semi-structured individual interviews or focus groups we elicited views from survivors of critical illness and family members of patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) regarding which features indicate important gastrointestinal bleeding. Quantitative demographic characteristics were collected. We analyzed qualitative data using inductive content analysis to develop a definition for patient-important upper gastrointestinal bleeding. SETTING: Canada and the United States. PARTICIPANTS: 51 ICU survivors and family members of ICU patients. RESULTS: Participants considered gastrointestinal bleeding to be important if it resulted in death, disability, or prolonged hospitalization. The following also signaled patient-important upper gastrointestinal bleeding: blood transfusion, vasopressors, endoscopy, CT-angiography, or surgery. Whether an intervention evinced concern depended on its effectiveness, side-effects, invasiveness and accessibility; contextual influences included participant familiarity and knowledge of interventions and trust in the clinical team. CONCLUSIONS: Survivors of critical illness and family members described patient-important upper gastrointestinal bleeding differently than current definitions of clinically-important upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

Selective digestive tract decontamination in critically ill adults with acute brain injuries: a post hoc analysis of a randomized clinical trial.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to determine whether selective decontamination of the digestive tract (SDD) reduces in-hospital mortality in mechanically ventilated critically ill adults admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) with acute brain injuries or conditions. METHODS: We carried out a post hoc analysis from a crossover, cluster randomized clinical trial. ICUs were randomly assigned to adopt or not to adopt a SDD strategy for two alternating 12-month periods, separated by a 3-month inter-period gap. Patients in the SDD group (n = 2791; 968 admitted to the ICU with an acute brain injury) received a 6-hourly application of an oral paste and administration of a gastric suspension containing colistin, tobramycin, and nystatin for the duration of mechanical ventilation, plus a 4-day course of an intravenous antibiotic with a suitable antimicrobial spectrum. Patients in the control group (n = 3191; 1093 admitted to the ICU with an acute brain injury) received standard care. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality within 90 days. There were four secondary clinical outcomes: death in ICU, ventilator-, ICU- and hospital-free days to day 90. RESULTS: Of 2061 patients with acute brain injuries (mean age, 55.8 years; 36.4% women), all completed the trial. In patients with acute brain injuries, there were 313/968 (32.3%) and 415/1093 (38%) in-hospital deaths in the SDD and standard care groups (unadjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.76, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.63-0.92; p = 0.004). The use of SDD was associated with statistically significant improvements in the four clinical secondary outcomes compared to standard care. There was no significant heterogeneity of treatment effect between patients with and without acute brain injuries (interaction p = 0.22). CONCLUSIONS: In this post hoc analysis of a randomized clinical trial in critically ill patients with acute brain injuries receiving mechanical ventilation, the use of SDD significantly reduced in-hospital mortality in patients compared to standard care without SDD. These findings require confirmation.

Patient-Level Meta-Analysis of Low-Dose Hydrocortisone in Adults with Septic Shock.

BACKGROUND: Trials and study-level meta-analyses have failed to resolve the role of corticosteroids in the management of patients with septic shock. Patient-level meta-analyses may provide more precise estimates of treatment effects, particularly subgroup effects. METHODS: We pooled individual patient data from septic shock trials investigating the adjunctive use of intravenous hydrocortisone. The primary outcome was 90-day all-cause mortality, and it was also analyzed across predefined subgroups. Secondary outcomes included mortality at intensive care unit and hospital discharge, at 28 and 180 days, and vasopressor-, ventilator-, and organ failure­free days. Adverse events included superinfection, muscle weakness, hyperglycemia, hypernatremia, and gastroduodenal bleeding. RESULTS: Of 24 eligible trials (n=8528), 17 (n=7882) provided individual patient data, and 7 (n=5929) provided 90-day mortality. The marginal relative risk (RR) for 90-day mortality of hydrocortisone versus placebo was 0.93 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.82 to 1.04; P=0.22; moderate certainty). It was 0.86 (95% CI, 0.79 to 0.92) for hydrocortisone with fludrocortisone and 0.96 (95% CI, 0.82 to 1.12) without fludrocortisone. There was no significant differential treatment effect across subgroups. Hydrocortisone was associated with little to no difference in any of the secondary outcomes except vasopressor-free days (mean difference, 1.24 days; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.73; high certainty). Hydrocortisone may not be associated with an increase in the risk of superinfection (RR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.95 to 1.15; low certainty), hyperglycemia (RR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.98 to 1.12; low certainty), or gastroduodenal bleeding (RR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.48; low certainty). Hydrocortisone may be associated with an increase in the risk of hypernatremia (RR, 2.01; 95% CI, 1.56 to 2.60; low certainty) and muscle weakness (n=2647; RR, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.49 to 1.99; low certainty). CONCLUSIONS: In this patient-level meta-analysis, hydrocortisone compared with placebo was not associated with reduced mortality for patients with septic shock. (Funded by "Programme d'Investissements d'Avenir," a research Professorship from the National Institute of Health and Care Research, Leadership Fellowships from the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia, and Emerging Leaders Fellowship from the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia; PROSPERO registration number, CRD42017062198.)

Effect of Selective Decontamination of the Digestive Tract on Hospital Mortality in Critically Ill Patients Receiving Mechanical Ventilation: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Whether selective decontamination of the digestive tract (SDD) reduces mortality in critically ill patients remains uncertain. Objective: To determine whether SDD reduces in-hospital mortality in critically ill adults. Design, Setting, and Participants: A cluster, crossover, randomized clinical trial that recruited 5982 mechanically ventilated adults from 19 intensive care units (ICUs) in Australia between April 2018 and May 2021 (final follow-up, August 2021). A contemporaneous ecological assessment recruited 8599 patients from participating ICUs between May 2017 and August 2021. Interventions: ICUs were randomly assigned to adopt or not adopt a SDD strategy for 2 alternating 12-month periods, separated by a 3-month interperiod gap. Patients in the SDD group (n = 2791) received a 6-hourly application of an oral paste and administration of a gastric suspension containing colistin, tobramycin, and nystatin for the duration of mechanical ventilation, plus a 4-day course of an intravenous antibiotic with a suitable antimicrobial spectrum. Patients in the control group (n = 3191) received standard care. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality within 90 days. There were 8 secondary outcomes, including the proportion of patients with new positive blood cultures, antibiotic-resistant organisms (AROs), and Clostridioides difficile infections. For the ecological assessment, a noninferiority margin of 2% was prespecified for 3 outcomes including new cultures of AROs. Results: Of 5982 patients (mean age, 58.3 years; 36.8% women) enrolled from 19 ICUs, all patients completed the trial. There were 753/2791 (27.0%) and 928/3191 (29.1%) in-hospital deaths in the SDD and standard care groups, respectively (mean difference, -1.7% [95% CI, -4.8% to 1.3%]; odds ratio, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.82-1.02]; P = .12). Of 8 prespecified secondary outcomes, 6 showed no significant differences. In the SDD vs standard care groups, 23.1% vs 34.6% had new ARO cultures (absolute difference, -11.0%; 95% CI, -14.7% to -7.3%), 5.6% vs 8.1% had new positive blood cultures (absolute difference, -1.95%; 95% CI, -3.5% to -0.4%), and 0.5% vs 0.9% had new C difficile infections (absolute difference, -0.24%; 95% CI, -0.6% to 0.1%). In 8599 patients enrolled in the ecological assessment, use of SDD was not shown to be noninferior with regard to the change in the proportion of patients who developed new AROs (-3.3% vs -1.59%; mean difference, -1.71% [1-sided 97.5% CI, -∞ to 4.31%] and 0.88% vs 0.55%; mean difference, -0.32% [1-sided 97.5% CI, -∞ to 5.47%]) in the first and second periods, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: Among critically ill patients receiving mechanical ventilation, SDD, compared with standard care without SDD, did not significantly reduce in-hospital mortality. However, the confidence interval around the effect estimate includes a clinically important benefit. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02389036.

The complications of opioid use during and post-intensive care admission: A narrative review.

Opioids are a commonly administered analgesic medication in the intensive care unit, primarily to facilitate invasive mechanical ventilation. Consensus guidelines advocate for an opioid-first strategy for the management of acute pain in ventilated patients. As a result, these patients are potentially exposed to high opioid doses for prolonged periods, increasing the risk of adverse effects. Adverse effects relevant to these critically ill patients include delirium, intensive care unit-acquired infections, acute opioid tolerance, iatrogenic withdrawal syndrome, opioid-induced hyperalgesia, persistent opioid use, and chronic post-intensive care unit pain. Consequently, there is a challenge of optimising analgesia while minimising these adverse effects. This narrative review will discuss the characteristics of opioid use in the intensive care unit, outline the potential short-term and long-term adverse effects of opioid therapy in critically ill patients, and outline a multifaceted strategy for opioid minimisation.

Pain assessment and analgesic management in patients admitted to intensive care: an Australian and New Zealand point prevalence study.

Objective: To describe pain assessment and analgesic management practices in patients in intensive care units (ICUs) in Australia and New Zealand. Design, setting and participants: Prospective, observational, multicentre, single-day point prevalence study conducted in Australian and New Zealand ICUs. Observational data were recorded for all adult patients admitted to an ICU without a neurological, neurosurgical or postoperative cardiac diagnosis. Demographic characteristics and data on pain assessment and analgesic management for a 24-hour period were collected. Main outcome measures: Types of pain assessment tools used and frequency of their use, use of opioid analgesia, use of adjuvant analgesia, and differences in pain assessment and analgesic management between postoperative and non-operative patients. Results: From the 499 patients enrolled from 45 ICUs, pain assessment was performed at least every 4 hours in 56% of patients (277/499), most commonly with a numerical rating scale. Overall, 286 patients (57%) received an opioid on the study day. Of the 181 mechanically ventilated patients, 135 (75%) received an intravenous opioid, with the predominant opioid infusion being fentanyl. The median dose of opioid infusion for ventilated patients was 140 mg oral morphine equivalents. Of the 318 non-ventilated patients, 41 (13%) received patient-controlled analgesia and 76 (24%) received an oral opioid, with the predominant opioid being oxycodone. Paracetamol was administered to 63 ventilated patients (35%) and 164 non-ventilated patients (52%), while 2% of all patients (11/499) received a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug. Ketamine infusion and regional analgesia were used in 15 patients (3%) and 17 patients (3%), respectively. Antineuropathic agents (predominantly gabapentinoids) were used in 53 patients (11%). Conclusions: Although a majority of ICU patients were frequently assessed for pain with a validated pain assessment tool, cumulative daily doses of opioids were high, and the use of multimodal adjuvant analgesia was low. Our data on current pain assessment and analgesic management practices may inform further research in this area.

WSES consensus conference guidelines: monitoring and management of severe adult traumatic brain injury patients with polytrauma in the first 24 hours.

The acute phase management of patients with severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) and polytrauma represents a major challenge. Guidelines for the care of these complex patients are lacking, and worldwide variability in clinical practice has been documented in recent studies. Consequently, the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) decided to organize an international consensus conference regarding the monitoring and management of severe adult TBI polytrauma patients during the first 24 hours after injury. A modified Delphi approach was adopted, with an agreement cut-off of 70%. Forty experts in this field (emergency surgeons, neurosurgeons, and intensivists) participated in the online consensus process. Sixteen recommendations were generated, with the aim of promoting rational care in this difficult setting.

Randomised evaluation of active control of temperature versus ordinary temperature management (REACTOR) trial.

PURPOSE: It is unknown whether protocols targeting systematic prevention and treatment of fever achieve lower mean body temperature than usual care in intensive care unit (ICU) patients. The objective of the Randomised Evaluation of Active Control of temperature vs. ORdinary temperature management trial was to confirm the feasibility of such a protocol with a view to conducting a larger trial. METHODS: We randomly assigned 184 adults without acute brain pathologies who had a fever in the previous 12 h, and were expected to be ventilated beyond the calendar day after recruitment, to systematic prevention and treatment of fever or usual care. The primary outcome was mean body temperature in the ICU within 7 days of randomisation. Secondary outcomes included in-hospital mortality, ICU-free days and survival time censored at hospital discharge. RESULTS: Compared with usual temperature management, active management significantly reduced mean temperature. In both groups, fever generally abated within 72 h. The mean temperature difference between groups was greatest in the first 48 h, when it was generally in the order of 0.5 °C. Overall, 23 of 89 patients assigned to active management (25.8%) and 23 of 89 patients assigned to usual management (25.8%) died in hospital (odds ratio 1.0, 95% CI 0.51-1.96, P = 1.0). There were no statistically significant differences between groups in ICU-free days or survival to day 90. CONCLUSIONS: Active temperature management reduced body temperature compared with usual care; however, fever abated rapidly, even in patients assigned to usual care, and the magnitude of temperature separation was small. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry Number, ACTRN12616001285448.

New sepsis definition changes incidence of sepsis in the intensive care unit.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the impact of adopting the proposed new diagnostic criteria for sepsis, based on Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) criteria, on the diagnosis and apparent mortality of sepsis in Australian and New Zealand intensive care units. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A two-stage, post hoc analysis of prospectively collected ICU research data from 3780 adult patients in 77 Australian and New Zealand ICUs on 7 study days, between 2009 and 2014. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The proportion of patients who were diagnosed with sepsis using the criteria for systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) and who met the SOFA criteria for sepsis, and the proportion of patients who were admitted to the ICU with a diagnosis consistent with infection, who met either, both or neither sets of criteria for sepsis; comparison of the demographic differences and in-hospital mortality between these groups. RESULTS: Of 926 patients diagnosed with sepsis on a study day using SIRS criteria, 796/923 (86.2% [95% CI, 84.0%-88.5%]) satisfied the SOFA criteria. Inhospital mortality was similar in these groups, with death recorded for 216/872 patients (24.8% [95% CI, 21.9%-27.8%]) who met the SIRS criteria for sepsis, and for 200/747 patients (26.8% [95% CI, 23.6%-30.1%]) who met both the SIRS and SOFA criteria for sepsis. Of 122 patients meeting the SIRS criteria but not the SOFA criteria, 16 (13.1% [95% CI, 7.7%-19.1%]) died. Of 241 patients admitted with an infective condition and complete data, 142 (58.9% [95% CI, 52.4%-65.2%]) satisfied the SIRS criteria for sepsis and 210 (87.1% [95% CI, 82.2%-91.1%]) satisfied the SOFA criteria. Of the 241 patients, 99 (41.1%) were not classified as having sepsis on the study day by SIRS criteria and, of these, 80 (80.8%) met the SOFA criteria. CONCLUSIONS: Adopting the SOFA criteria will increase the apparent incidence of sepsis in patients admitted to the ICU with infective conditions without affecting the mortality rate. Prospective evaluation of the effect of adopting the new definition of sepsis is required.

Protocol and statistical analysis plan for the Randomised Evaluation of Active Control of Temperature versus Ordinary Temperature Management (REACTOR) trial.

BACKGROUND: Body temperature can be reduced in febrile patients in the intensive care unit using medicines and physical cooling devices, but it is not known whether systematically preventing and treating fever reduces body temperature compared with standard care. OBJECTIVE: To describe the study protocol and statistical analysis plan for the Randomised Evaluation of Active Control of Temperature versus Ordinary Temperature Management (REACTOR) trial. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Protocol for a phase II, multicentre trial to be conducted in Australian and New Zealand ICUs admitting adult patients. We will recruit 184 adults without acute brain injury who are expected to be ventilated in the ICU beyond the day after randomisation. We will use open, random, parallel assignment to systematic prevention and treatment of fever, or to standard temperature management. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary end point will be mean body temperature, calculated from body temperatures measured 6-hourly for 7 days (168 hours) or until ICU discharge, whichever is sooner. Secondary end points are ICU-free days, in-hospital and cause-specific mortality (censored at Day 90) and survival time to Day 90 (censored at hospital discharge). RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: The trial will determine whether active temperature control reduces body temperature compared with standard care. It is primarily being conducted to establish whether a phase III trial with a patient-centred end point of Day 90 mortality is justified and feasible.

A Consensus-Based Interpretation of the Benchmark Evidence from South American Trials: Treatment of Intracranial Pressure Trial.

Widely-varying published and presented analyses of the Benchmark Evidence From South American Trials: Treatment of Intracranial Pressure (BEST TRIP) randomized controlled trial of intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring have suggested denying trial generalizability, questioning the need for ICP monitoring in severe traumatic brain injury (sTBI), re-assessing current clinical approaches to monitored ICP, and initiating a general ICP-monitoring moratorium. In response to this dissonance, 23 clinically-active, international opinion leaders in acute-care sTBI management met to draft a consensus statement to interpret this study. A Delphi method-based approach employed iterative pre-meeting polling to codify the group's general opinions, followed by an in-person meeting wherein individual statements were refined. Statements required an agreement threshold of more than 70% by blinded voting for approval. Seven precisely-worded statements resulted, with agreement levels of 83% to 100%. These statements, which should be read in toto to properly reflect the group's consensus positions, conclude that the BEST TRIP trial: 1) studied protocols, not ICP-monitoring per se; 2) applies only to those protocols and specific study groups and should not be generalized to other treatment approaches or patient groups; 3) strongly calls for further research on ICP interpretation and use; 4) should be applied cautiously to regions with much different treatment milieu; 5) did not investigate the utility of treating monitored ICP in the specific patient group with established intracranial hypertension; 6) should not change the practice of those currently monitoring ICP; and 7) provided a protocol, used in non-monitored study patients, that should be considered when treating without ICP monitoring. Consideration of these statements can clarify study interpretation.

A protocol for the 0.9% saline versus Plasma-Lyte 148 for intensive care fluid therapy (SPLIT) study.

BACKGROUND: 0.9% saline is the most commonly used intravenous (IV) fluid in the world. However, recent data raise the possibility that, compared with buffered crystalloid fluids such as Plasma-Lyte 148, the administration of 0.9% saline to intensive care unit patients might increase their risk of acute kidney injury (AKI). OBJECTIVE: To describe the protocol for the 0.9% Saline v Plasma-Lyte 148 for ICU Fluid Therapy (SPLIT) study. METHODS: This is a multicentre, cluster-randomised, double crossover feasibility study to be conducted in four New Zealand tertiary ICUs over a 28-week period and will enroll about 2300 participants. All ICU patients who need crystalloid IV fluid therapy (except those with established renal failure needing dialysis and those admitted to the ICU for palliative care) will be enrolled. Participating ICUs will be randomly assigned to 0.9% saline or Plasma-Lyte 148 as the routine crystalloid IV fluid, in a blinded fashion, in four alternating 7-week blocks. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome will be the proportion of patients who develop AKI in the ICU. Secondary outcomes will include the difference between the most recent serum creatinine level measured before study enrollment and the peak serum creatinine level in the ICU; use of renal replacement therapy; and ICU and in hospital mortality. All analyses will be conducted on an intention-to-treat basis. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: The SPLIT study started on 1 April 2014 and will provide preliminary data on the comparative effectiveness of using 0.9% saline v Plasma- Lyte 148 as the routine IV fluid therapy in ICU patients.

Statistical analysis plan for the HEAT trial: a multicentre randomised placebo-controlled trial of intravenous paracetamol in intensive care unit patients with fever and infection.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: We describe the statistical analysis plan (SAP) for the Permissive Hyperthermia through Avoidance of Paracetamol in Known or Suspected Infection in the Intensive Care Unit (HEAT) trial, a 700-patient, prospective, randomised, Phase 2b, multicentre, double-blind, parallel-groups, placebo-controlled trial of paracetamol administration for the treatment of fever in critically ill patients with known or suspected infection. METHODS: The data fields described are those outlined in the study protocol published previously. We describe the plan for the presentation and comparison of baseline characteristics, process measures and outcomes. We describe baseline characteristics, and define and categorise trial outcomes according to their assigned importance. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: We developed an SAP for the HEAT trial, and produced a mock Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials diagram and tables. Our prespecified SAP accords with high-quality standards of internal validity and should minimise future analysis bias.