Introducing an integrated intermediate care unit improves ICU utilization: a prospective intervention study.

BACKGROUND: Improvement of appropriate bed use and access to intensive care (ICU) beds is essential in optimizing utilization of ICU capacity. The introduction of an intermediate care unit (IMC) integrated in the ICU care may improve this utilization. METHOD: In a before-after prospective intervention study in a university hospital mixed ICU, the impact of introducing a six-bed mixed IMC unit supervised and staffed by ICU physicians was investigated. Changes in ICU utilization (length of stay, frequency of mechanical ventilation use), nursing workload assessed byTISS-28 score, as well as inappropriate bed use, accessibility of the ICU (number of referrals), and clinical outcome indicators (readmission and mortality rates) were measured. RESULTS: During 17 months, data of 1027 ICU patients were collected. ICU utilization improved significantly with an increased appropriate use of ICU beds. However, the number of referrals, readmissions to the ICU and mortality rates did not decrease after the IMC was opened. CONCLUSION: The IMC contributed to a more appropriate use of ICU facilities and did result in a significant increase in mean nursing workload at the ICU.

Global utilization of low-dose corticosteroids in severe sepsis and septic shock: a report from the PROGRESS registry.

INTRODUCTION: The benefits and use of low-dose corticosteroids (LDCs) in severe sepsis and septic shock remain controversial. Surviving sepsis campaign guidelines suggest LDC use for septic shock patients poorly responsive to fluid resuscitation and vasopressor therapy. Their use is suspected to be wide-spread, but paucity of data regarding global practice exists. The purpose of this study was to compare baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes of patients treated or not treated with LDC from the international PROGRESS (PROmoting Global Research Excellence in Severe Sepsis) cohort study of severe sepsis. METHODS: Patients enrolled in the PROGRESS registry were evaluated for use of vasopressor and LDC (equivalent or lesser potency to hydrocortisone 50 mg six-hourly plus 50 microg 9-alpha-fludrocortisone) for treatment of severe sepsis at any time in intensive care units (ICUs). Baseline characteristics and hospital mortality were analyzed, and logistic regression techniques used to develop propensity score and outcome models adjusted for baseline imbalances between groups. RESULTS: A total of 8,968 patients with severe sepsis and sufficient data for analysis were studied. A total of 79.8% (7,160/8,968) of patients received vasopressors, and 34.0% (3,051/8,968) of patients received LDC. Regional use of LDC was highest in Europe (51.1%) and lowest in Asia (21.6%). Country use was highest in Brazil (62.9%) and lowest in Malaysia (9.0%). A total of 14.2% of patients on LDC were not receiving any vasopressor therapy. LDC patients were older, had more co-morbidities and higher disease severity scores. Patients receiving LDC spent longer in ICU than patients who did not (median of 12 versus 8 days; P <0.001). Overall hospital mortality rates were greater in the LDC than in the non-LDC group (58.0% versus 43.0%; P <0.001). After adjusting for baseline imbalances, in all mortality models (with vasopressor use), a consistent association remained between LDC and hospital mortality (odds ratios varying from 1.30 to 1.47). CONCLUSIONS: Widespread use of LDC for the treatment of severe sepsis with significant regional and country variation exists. In this study, 14.2% of patients received LDC despite the absence of evidence of shock. Hospital mortality was higher in the LDC group and remained higher after adjustment for key determinates of mortality.

The Surviving Sepsis Campaign: results of an international guideline-based performance improvement program targeting severe sepsis.

OBJECTIVE: The Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC or "the Campaign") developed guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock. A performance improvement initiative targeted changing clinical behavior (process improvement) via bundles based on key SSC guideline recommendations on process improvement and patient outcomes. DESIGN AND SETTING: A multifaceted intervention to facilitate compliance with selected guideline recommendations in the ICU, ED, and wards of individual hospitals and regional hospital networks was implemented voluntarily in the US, Europe, and South America. Elements of the guidelines were "bundled" into two sets of targets to be completed within 6 h and within 24 h. An analysis was conducted on data submitted from January 2005 through March 2008. MAIN RESULTS: Data from 15,022 subjects at 165 sites were analyzed to determine the compliance with bundle targets and association with hospital mortality. Compliance with the entire resuscitation bundle increased linearly from 10.9% in the first site quarter to 31.3% by the end of 2 years (P<0.0001). Compliance with the entire management bundle started at 18.4% in the first quarter and increased to 36.1% by the end of 2 years (P = 0.008). Compliance with all bundle elements increased significantly, except for inspiratory plateau pressure, which was high at baseline. Unadjusted hospital mortality decreased from 37 to 30.8% over 2 years (P = 0.001). The adjusted odds ratio for mortality improved the longer a site was in the Campaign, resulting in an adjusted absolute drop of 0.8% per quarter and 5.4% over 2 years (95% CI, 2.5-8.4%). CONCLUSIONS: The Campaign was associated with sustained, continuous quality improvement in sepsis care. Although not necessarily cause and effect, a reduction in reported hospital mortality rates was associated with participation. The implications of this study may serve as an impetus for similar improvement efforts.

The Surviving Sepsis Campaign: results of an international guideline-based performance improvement program targeting severe sepsis.

OBJECTIVE: The Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC or "the Campaign") developed guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock. A performance improvement initiative targeted changing clinical behavior (process improvement) via bundles based on key SSC guideline recommendations. DESIGN AND SETTING: A multifaceted intervention to facilitate compliance with selected guideline recommendations in the intensive care unit, emergency department, and wards of individual hospitals and regional hospital networks was implemented voluntarily in the United States, Europe, and South America. Elements of the guidelines were "bundled" into two sets of targets to be completed within 6 hrs and within 24 hrs. An analysis was conducted on data submitted from January 2005 through March 2008. SUBJECTS: A total of 15,022 subjects. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Data from 15,022 subjects at 165 sites were analyzed to determine the compliance with bundle targets and association with hospital mortality. Compliance with the entire resuscitation bundle increased linearly from 10.9% in the first site quarter to 31.3% by the end of 2 yrs (p < .0001). Compliance with the entire management bundle started at 18.4% in the first quarter and increased to 36.1% by the end of 2 yrs (p = .008). Compliance with all bundle elements increased significantly, except for inspiratory plateau pressure, which was high at baseline. Unadjusted hospital mortality decreased from 37% to 30.8% over 2 yrs (p = .001). The adjusted odds ratio for mortality improved the longer a site was in the Campaign, resulting in an adjusted absolute drop of 0.8% per quarter and 5.4% over 2 yrs (95% confidence interval, 2.5-8.4). CONCLUSIONS: The Campaign was associated with sustained, continuous quality improvement in sepsis care. Although not necessarily cause and effect, a reduction in reported hospital mortality rates was associated with participation. The implications of this study may serve as an impetus for similar improvement efforts.

Predisposition, insult/infection, response, and organ dysfunction: A new model for staging severe sepsis.

OBJECTIVE: To generate and validate an initial version of the predisposition, insult/infection, response, and organ dysfunction (PIRO) staging model for risk stratification in severe sepsis. The goal was to create distinct levels of mortality risk within each of the four categories (P, I, R, and O), and that these risk levels would be meaningful in terms of prediction independent of the other categories. DESIGN: : Retrospective analysis using a statistical model utilizing two large, global databases of patients with severe sepsis. SETTING AND PATIENTS: Database #1: Placebo-treated patients from a phase III clinical trial of patients with severe sepsis (PROtein C Worldwide Evaluation in Severe Sepsis [PROWESS], 840 patients). Database #2: Global severe sepsis registry performed in 276 intensive care units in 37 countries (PROmoting Global Research Excellence in Severe Sepsis [PROGRESS], 10,610 patients). INTERVENTIONS: None. METHODS: Classification and regression trees were used to classify patients and derive a scoring system from the PROWESS and PROGRESS databases with internal validation. Regression tree parameters included Chi-square tests and a minimum of five patients per node. The risk levels were done in a stepwise manner, adjusting for the previous categories. Initially, the predisposition scoring was developed, and subsequently, the infection scoring was then developed after adjusting for the predisposition levels, and so on. Logistic regression analyses, odds ratios, and area under the receiver operator characteristic curve were used to evaluate the scoring systems. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Each of the four PIRO components had similar odds ratios in multivariable logistic regressions. In PROWESS, the correlation of the PIRO total score and in-hospital mortality rates was 0.974 (p < 0.0001), and in PROGRESS, the correlation of the PIRO total score and hospital mortality rates was 0.998 (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: PIRO can develop into an effective model for staging severe sepsis, seems to be predictive of mortality, and may be useful in future sepsis research.

An international survey: Public awareness and perception of sepsis.

BACKGROUND: Sepsis is a common cause of death throughout the world. Early treatment improves outcome; however, treatment may be delayed if the patient does not present himself/herself for medical care until late in the disease process. Lack of knowledge about the syndrome may contribute to delay in presenting for medical care. However, we need to acknowledge the complexity of sepsis. General awareness of sepsis by the public may increase political pressure for research funding. Increased public awareness of acute myocardial infarction has contributed to reduced mortality over the last 50 yrs. This example provides a rationale for future efforts to increase the public awareness of sepsis. OBJECTIVE: The survey was designed to gain insight into public perceptions and attitudes regarding sepsis. DESIGN: Prospective, international survey performed using structured telephone interviews. SUBJECTS: A total of 6021 interviewees, 5021 in Europe and 1000 in the United States. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: In Italy, Spain, the United Kingdom, France and the United States, a mean of 88% of interviewees had never heard of the term "sepsis". In Germany 53% of people knew the word sepsis. In Italy, Spain, United Kingdom, France, and United States, of people who recognized the term sepsis, 58% did not recognize that sepsis is a leading cause of death. CONCLUSIONS: There is poor public awareness about the existence of a syndrome known as sepsis. Results of this questionnaire underscore the challenges in early management and treatment of infected patients at risk for developing sepsis syndrome.

Reduced citrulline production in sepsis is related to diminished de novo arginine and nitric oxide production.

BACKGROUND: L-Arginine is an important precursor of nitric oxide (NO) and protein synthesis. Arginine is produced in the body (mainly kidney) by de novo production from citrulline and by protein breakdown. Arginine availability appears to be limited in sepsis. OBJECTIVE: The objective was to compare arginine and citrulline metabolism in septic patients and nonseptic control patients in an intensive care unit (ICU) and in healthy control subjects. DESIGN: Ten patients with septic shock, 7 critically ill control patients, and 16 healthy elderly subjects were studied. Metabolism was measured by using a primed continuous (2 h) stable-isotope infusion protocol. NO production was calculated as the conversion rate of arginine to citrulline; de novo arginine production was calculated as the conversion rate of citrulline to arginine. Arterial blood (arterialized venous blood in healthy subjects) was collected for the measurement of amino acid enrichment and concentrations. Data are reported as means +/- SDs. RESULTS: Whole-body citrulline production was significantly lower in septic patients (4.5 +/- 2.1 micromol . kg(-1) . h(-1)) than in ICU control patients (10.1 +/- 2.9 micromol . kg(-1) . h(-1); P < 0.01) and in healthy control subjects (13.7 +/- 4.1 micromol . kg(-1) . h(-1); P < 0.001). Accordingly, de novo arginine production was lower in patients with sepsis (3.3 +/- 3.7 micromol . kg(-1) . h(-1)) than in healthy controls (11.9 +/- 6.6 micromol . kg(-1) . h(-1); P < 0.01) and tended to be lower in septic patients than in ICU control patients (10.9 +/- 9.4 micromol . kg(-1) . h(-1); P = 0.05). NO production was lower in septic patients than in healthy control subjects (P < 0.01), whereas a larger part of arginine was converted to urea in sepsis. CONCLUSIONS: Citrulline production is severely low in patients with sepsis and is related to diminished de novo arginine and NO production. These metabolic alterations contribute to reduced citrulline and arginine availability, and these findings warrant further studies of therapeutic nutritional interventions to restore arginine metabolism in sepsis.

Changes in hospital costs after introducing an intermediate care unit: a comparative observational study.

INTRODUCTION: The high cost of critical care resources has resulted in strategies to reduce the costs of ruling out low-risk patients by developing intermediate care units (IMCs). The aim of this study was to compare changes in total hospital costs for intensive care patients before and after the introduction of an IMC at the University Hospital Maastricht. METHODS: The design was a comparative longitudinal study. The setting was a university hospital with a mixed intensive care unit (ICU), an IMC, and general wards. Changes in total hospital costs were measured for patients who were admitted to the ICU before and after the introduction of the IMC. The comparison of interest was the opening of a six-bed mixed IMC. RESULTS: The mean total hospital cost per patient increased significantly. Before the introduction of the IMC, the total hospital cost per patient was n12,961 (+/- n14,530) and afterwards it rose to n16,513 (+/- n17,718). Multiple regression analysis was used to determine to what extent patient characteristics explained these higher hospital costs using mortality, type of stay, diagnostic categories, length of ICU and ward stay, and the Therapeutic Intervention Scoring System (TISS) as predictors. More surgical patients, greater requirements of therapeutic interventions on the ICU admission day, and longer ICU stay in patients did explain the increase in hospital costs, rather than the introduction of the IMC. CONCLUSION: After the introduction of the IMC, the higher mean total hospital costs for patients with a high TISS score and longer ICU stay explained the cost increase.

Influence of antibiotic therapy on the cytological diagnosis of ventilator-associated pneumonia.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the influence of antibiotics on the value of various cytological parameters, and their combinations, in diagnosing ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP). DESIGN: Prospective study. SETTING: The general intensive care unit (17 beds) of the University Hospital Maastricht. PATIENTS: Three hundred and thirty-five episodes of clinically suspected VAP (defined by the clinical and radiological criteria previously described by Bonten et al.) in 282 patients were studied. INTERVENTIONS: No additional interventions were conducted. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: Bronchoalveolar lavage fluid cytology included a total cell count per millilitre, differential cell count and the percentage of infected cells (cells containing phagocytised organisms). Antibiotic therapy from 72 h prior to lavage was recorded. Areas under the curve (AUCs) of receiver operating characteristic curves were calculated for various cytological parameters and their combinations, in patients with and without antibiotic therapy. In 126 episodes (37.6%) in 106 patients, VAP was confirmed. There was no difference in AUCs between patients with and without antibiotic therapy for any parameter studied. The most prominent AUCs were (for patient groups with and without antibiotics combined): total cell count, 0.65; percentage polymorphonuclear neutrophils, 0.71; and percentage infected cells, 0.90. The combination of percentage infected cells with any other cytological parameter did not increase the AUC. CONCLUSION: Antibiotic therapy did not influence the predictive value of the percentage infected cells in BALF in diagnosing VAP.

Surviving Sepsis Campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2008.

OBJECTIVE: To provide an update to the original Surviving Sepsis Campaign clinical management guidelines, "Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock," published in 2004. DESIGN: Modified Delphi method with a consensus conference of 55 international experts, several subsequent meetings of subgroups and key individuals, teleconferences, and electronic-based discussion among subgroups and among the entire committee. This process was conducted independently of any industry funding. METHODS: We used the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system to guide assessment of quality of evidence from high (A) to very low (D) and to determine the strength of recommendations. A strong recommendation (1) indicates that an intervention's desirable effects clearly outweigh its undesirable effects (risk, burden, cost) or clearly do not. Weak recommendations (2) indicate that the tradeoff between desirable and undesirable effects is less clear. The grade of strong or weak is considered of greater clinical importance than a difference in letter level of quality of evidence. In areas without complete agreement, a formal process of resolution was developed and applied. Recommendations are grouped into those directly targeting severe sepsis, recommendations targeting general care of the critically ill patient that are considered high priority in severe sepsis, and pediatric considerations. RESULTS: Key recommendations, listed by category, include early goal-directed resuscitation of the septic patient during the first 6 hrs after recognition (1C); blood cultures before antibiotic therapy (1C); imaging studies performed promptly to confirm potential source of infection (1C); administration of broad-spectrum antibiotic therapy within 1 hr of diagnosis of septic shock (1B) and severe sepsis without septic shock (1D); reassessment of antibiotic therapy with microbiology and clinical data to narrow coverage, when appropriate (1C); a usual 7-10 days of antibiotic therapy guided by clinical response (1D); source control with attention to the balance of risks and benefits of the chosen method (1C); administration of either crystalloid or colloid fluid resuscitation (1B); fluid challenge to restore mean circulating filling pressure (1C); reduction in rate of fluid administration with rising filing pressures and no improvement in tissue perfusion (1D); vasopressor preference for norepinephrine or dopamine to maintain an initial target of mean arterial pressure > or = 65 mm Hg (1C); dobutamine inotropic therapy when cardiac output remains low despite fluid resuscitation and combined inotropic/vasopressor therapy (1C); stress-dose steroid therapy given only in septic shock after blood pressure is identified to be poorly responsive to fluid and vasopressor therapy (2C); recombinant activated protein C in patients with severe sepsis and clinical assessment of high risk for death (2B except 2C for postoperative patients). In the absence of tissue hypoperfusion, coronary artery disease, or acute hemorrhage, target a hemoglobin of 7-9 g/dL (1B); a low tidal volume (1B) and limitation of inspiratory plateau pressure strategy (1C) for acute lung injury (ALI)/acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS); application of at least a minimal amount of positive end-expiratory pressure in acute lung injury (1C); head of bed elevation in mechanically ventilated patients unless contraindicated (1B); avoiding routine use of pulmonary artery catheters in ALI/ARDS (1A); to decrease days of mechanical ventilation and ICU length of stay, a conservative fluid strategy for patients with established ALI/ARDS who are not in shock (1C); protocols for weaning and sedation/analgesia (1B); using either intermittent bolus sedation or continuous infusion sedation with daily interruptions or lightening (1B); avoidance of neuromuscular blockers, if at all possible (1B); institution of glycemic control (1B), targeting a blood glucose < 150 mg/dL after initial stabilization (2C); equivalency of continuous veno-veno hemofiltration or intermittent hemodialysis (2B); prophylaxis for deep vein thrombosis (1A); use of stress ulcer prophylaxis to prevent upper gastrointestinal bleeding using H2 blockers (1A) or proton pump inhibitors (1B); and consideration of limitation of support where appropriate (1D). Recommendations specific to pediatric severe sepsis include greater use of physical examination therapeutic end points (2C); dopamine as the first drug of choice for hypotension (2C); steroids only in children with suspected or proven adrenal insufficiency (2C); and a recommendation against the use of recombinant activated protein C in children (1B). CONCLUSIONS: There was strong agreement among a large cohort of international experts regarding many level 1 recommendations for the best current care of patients with severe sepsis. Evidenced-based recommendations regarding the acute management of sepsis and septic shock are the first step toward improved outcomes for this important group of critically ill patients.

Surviving Sepsis Campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2008.

OBJECTIVE: To provide an update to the original Surviving Sepsis Campaign clinical management guidelines, "Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock," published in 2004. DESIGN: Modified Delphi method with a consensus conference of 55 international experts, several subsequent meetings of subgroups and key individuals, teleconferences, and electronic-based discussion among subgroups and among the entire committee. This process was conducted independently of any industry funding. METHODS: We used the GRADE system to guide assessment of quality of evidence from high (A) to very low (D) and to determine the strength of recommendations. A strong recommendation indicates that an intervention's desirable effects clearly outweigh its undesirable effects (risk, burden, cost), or clearly do not. Weak recommendations indicate that the tradeoff between desirable and undesirable effects is less clear. The grade of strong or weak is considered of greater clinical importance than a difference in letter level of quality of evidence. In areas without complete agreement, a formal process of resolution was developed and applied. Recommendations are grouped into those directly targeting severe sepsis, recommendations targeting general care of the critically ill patient that are considered high priority in severe sepsis, and pediatric considerations. RESULTS: Key recommendations, listed by category, include: early goal-directed resuscitation of the septic patient during the first 6 hrs after recognition (1C); blood cultures prior to antibiotic therapy (1C); imaging studies performed promptly to confirm potential source of infection (1C); administration of broad-spectrum antibiotic therapy within 1 hr of diagnosis of septic shock (1B) and severe sepsis without septic shock (1D); reassessment of antibiotic therapy with microbiology and clinical data to narrow coverage, when appropriate (1C); a usual 7-10 days of antibiotic therapy guided by clinical response (1D); source control with attention to the balance of risks and benefits of the chosen method (1C); administration of either crystalloid or colloid fluid resuscitation (1B); fluid challenge to restore mean circulating filling pressure (1C); reduction in rate of fluid administration with rising filing pressures and no improvement in tissue perfusion (1D); vasopressor preference for norepinephrine or dopamine to maintain an initial target of mean arterial pressure > or = 65 mm Hg (1C); dobutamine inotropic therapy when cardiac output remains low despite fluid resuscitation and combined inotropic/vasopressor therapy (1C); stress-dose steroid therapy given only in septic shock after blood pressure is identified to be poorly responsive to fluid and vasopressor therapy (2C); recombinant activated protein C in patients with severe sepsis and clinical assessment of high risk for death (2B except 2C for post-operative patients). In the absence of tissue hypoperfusion, coronary artery disease, or acute hemorrhage, target a hemoglobin of 7-9 g/dL (1B); a low tidal volume (1B) and limitation of inspiratory plateau pressure strategy (1C) for acute lung injury (ALI)/acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS); application of at least a minimal amount of positive end-expiratory pressure in acute lung injury (1C); head of bed elevation in mechanically ventilated patients unless contraindicated (1B); avoiding routine use of pulmonary artery catheters in ALI/ARDS (1A); to decrease days of mechanical ventilation and ICU length of stay, a conservative fluid strategy for patients with established ALI/ARDS who are not in shock (1C); protocols for weaning and sedation/analgesia (1B); using either intermittent bolus sedation or continuous infusion sedation with daily interruptions or lightening (1B); avoidance of neuromuscular blockers, if at all possible (1B); institution of glycemic control (1B) targeting a blood glucose < 150 mg/dL after initial stabilization ( 2C ); equivalency of continuous veno-veno hemofiltration or intermittent hemodialysis (2B); prophylaxis for deep vein thrombosis (1A); use of stress ulcer prophylaxis to prevent upper GI bleeding using H2 blockers (1A) or proton pump inhibitors (1B); and consideration of limitation of support where appropriate (1D). Recommendations specific to pediatric severe sepsis include: greater use of physical examination therapeutic end points (2C); dopamine as the first drug of choice for hypotension (2C); steroids only in children with suspected or proven adrenal insufficiency (2C); a recommendation against the use of recombinant activated protein C in children (1B). CONCLUSION: There was strong agreement among a large cohort of international experts regarding many level 1 recommendations for the best current care of patients with severe sepsis. Evidenced-based recommendations regarding the acute management of sepsis and septic shock are the first step toward improved outcomes for this important group of critically ill patients.

International integrated database for the evaluation of severe sepsis and drotrecogin alfa (activated) therapy: analysis of efficacy and safety data in a large surgical cohort.

BACKGROUND: The International Integrated Database for the Evaluation of Severe Sepsis and Drotrecogin alfa (activated) Therapy includes an extensive cohort of surgical patients (1659/4459; 37%). This database broadens the experience reported on a comparatively small set of surgical patients from the pivotal Protein C Worldwide Evaluation in Severe Sepsis trial to examine issues of safety and efficacy in a much larger cohort. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of prospectively defined outcomes from 5 integrated clinical studies of severe sepsis. Multivariable analyses incorporated propensity scores, treatment, and significant baseline risk factors as independent variables in logistic regression models for 2 outcomes: serious adverse events that were observed during infusion and 28-day, all-cause mortality rates. Adjusted odds ratios were calculated for clinically important strata. Multiple subcategories of serious bleeding-event rates are presented. RESULTS: Although surgical patients who were treated with drotrecogin alfa [activated] (DrotAA) experienced a greater proportion of serious bleeding events during the infusion period, most of the patients were treated without fatal consequence. A 10.7% absolute all cause mortality risk reduction (adjusted odds ratio, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.45-0.97) was observed for DrotAA-treated, high-risk (Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II, >/= 25) surgical patients. We could not demonstrate a survival benefit in DrotAA-treated, low-risk (Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II, <25) surgical patients. When surgical patients were stratified by number of organ dysfunctions, absolute risk reductions were observed in both categories: multiorgan (4.3%) and single (4.5%). CONCLUSION: International Integrated Database for the Evaluation of Severe Sepsis and Drotrecogin alfa (activated) Therapy analyses affirmed the favorable benefit/risk profile of DrotAA for surgical patients. The serious adverse event rate that was experienced by surgical patients during the study drug infusion period was 7.5% in the DrotAA-treated group versus 6.3% in the placebo-treated group (odds ratio, 1.41; 95% CI, 0.89-2.25). The clinical benefit of DrotAA therapy paralleled baseline risk of death and substantiated findings from the Protein C Worldwide Evaluation in Severe Sepsis study. Future analyses are needed to evaluate the special relationships among sepsis severity, bleeding management, and the postoperative timing of DrotAA administration.

International integrated database for the evaluation of severe sepsis and drotrecogin alfa (activated) therapy: analysis of efficacy and safety data in a large surgical cohort.

BACKGROUND: The International Integrated Database for the Evaluation of Severe Sepsis and Drotrecogin alfa (activated) Therapy includes an extensive cohort of surgical patients (1659/4459; 37%). This database broadens the experience reported on a comparatively small set of surgical patients from the pivotal Protein C Worldwide Evaluation in Severe Sepsis trial to examine issues of safety and efficacy in a much larger cohort. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of prospectively defined outcomes from 5 integrated clinical studies of severe sepsis. Multivariable analyses incorporated propensity scores, treatment, and significant baseline risk factors as independent variables in logistic regression models for 2 outcomes: serious adverse events that were observed during infusion and 28-day, all-cause mortality rates. Adjusted odds ratios were calculated for clinically important strata. Multiple subcategories of serious bleeding-event rates are presented. RESULTS: Although surgical patients who were treated with drotrecogin alfa [activated] (DrotAA) experienced a greater proportion of serious bleeding events during the infusion period, most of the patients were treated without fatal consequence. A 10.7% absolute all cause mortality risk reduction (adjusted odds ratio, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.45-0.97) was observed for DrotAA-treated, high-risk (Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II, >or=25) surgical patients. We could not demonstrate a survival benefit in DrotAA-treated, low-risk (Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II, <25) surgical patients. When surgical patients were stratified by number of organ dysfunctions, absolute risk reductions were observed in both categories: multiorgan (4.3%) and single (4.5%). CONCLUSION: International Integrated Database for the Evaluation of Severe Sepsis and Drotrecogin alfa (activated) Therapy analyses affirmed the favorable benefit/risk profile of DrotAA for surgical patients. The serious adverse event rate that was experienced by surgical patients during the study drug infusion period was 7.5% in the DrotAA-treated group versus 6.3% in the placebo-treated group (odds ratio, 1.41; 95% CI, 0.89-2.25). The clinical benefit of DrotAA therapy paralleled baseline risk of death and substantiated findings from the Protein C Worldwide Evaluation in Severe Sepsis study. Future analyses are needed to evaluate the special relationships among sepsis severity, bleeding management, and the postoperative timing of DrotAA administration.

Point-of-care blood analyzer during the interhospital transport of critically ill children.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the influence of point-of-care laboratory results (arterial blood gases, ionized calcium, potassium, sodium, glucose, hematocrit and hemoglobin) on therapeutic interventions during interhospital pediatric intensive care transport. DESIGN: Prospective observational study. SETTINGS: Specialist pediatric intensive care retrieval team of a university hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Critically ill pediatric patients who were referred from a community hospital to a pediatric intensive care of a tertiary center. The retrieval team sampled arterial blood during the time of stabilization in the referring hospital and during transport. All results were recorded and for each result the physician of the specialist retrieval team wrote down the influence on the treatment (none, partly, only). The physician specified the kind of intervention. RESULTS: Point-of-care blood analyses influenced the therapeutic management in 76.5% of all blood samples and in 86.2% of the referred patients. Of all interventions, 42.9% were based only on the laboratory results. The majority of interventions were adjustments of the mechanical ventilation. Point-of-care blood analyses reduced the delay in treatment of potentially life-threatening abnormalities of laboratory results (severe hypokalemia and low hematocrit). CONCLUSIONS: During interhospital pediatric intensive care transport, point-of-care blood analyses frequently led to therapeutic interventions. Some abnormal blood results were potentially life threatening and could not have been discovered without point-of-care measurement. We therefore recommend the use of a point-of-care blood analyzer during interhospital intensive care transports, not only for blood gases but also for electrolytes, glucose and hematocrit.

Oral decontamination with chlorhexidine reduces the incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia.

RATIONALE: Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is the most frequently occurring nosocomial infection associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Although oral decontamination with antibiotics reduces incidences of VAP, it is not recommended because of potential selection of antibiotic-resistant pathogens. We hypothesized that oral decontamination with either chlorhexidine (CHX, 2%) or CHX/colistin (CHX/COL, 2%/2%) would reduce and postpone development of VAP, and oral and endotracheal colonization. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effect of oral decontamination with CHX or CHX/COL on VAP incidence and time to development of VAP. METHODS: Consecutive patients needing mechanical ventilation for 48 h or more were enrolled in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial with three arms: CHX, CHX/COL, and placebo (PLAC). Trial medication was applied every 6 h into the buccal cavity. Oropharyngeal swabs were obtained daily and quantitatively analyzed for gram-positive and gram-negative microorganisms. Endotracheal colonization was monitored twice weekly. RESULTS: Of 385 patients included, 130 received PLAC, 127 CHX and 128 CHX/COL. Baseline characteristics were comparable. The daily risk of VAP was reduced in both treatment groups compared with PLAC: 65% (hazard ratio [HR]=0.352; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.160, 0. 791; p=0.012) for CHX and 55% (HR=0.454; 95% CI, 0.224, 0. 925; p=0.030) for CHX/COL. CHX/COL provided significant reduction in oropharyngeal colonization with both gram-negative and gram-positive microorganisms, whereas CHX mostly affected gram-positive microorganisms. Endotracheal colonization was reduced for CHX/COL patients and to a lesser extent for CHX patients. No differences in duration of mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit stay, or intensive care unit survival could be demonstrated. CONCLUSIONS: Topical oral decontamination with CHX or CHX/COL reduces the incidence of VAP.

Feasibility and effects of the semirecumbent position to prevent ventilator-associated pneumonia: a randomized study.

CONTEXT: Reducing aspiration of gastric contents by placing mechanically ventilated patients in a semirecumbent position has been associated with lower incidences of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP). The feasibility and efficacy of this intervention in a larger patient population, however, are unknown. OBJECTIVE: Assessment of the feasibility of the semirecumbent position for intensive care unit patients and its influence on development of VAP. DESIGN: In a prospective multicentered trial, critically ill patients undergoing mechanical ventilation were randomly assigned to the semirecumbent position, with a target backrest elevation of 45 degrees , or standard care (i.e., supine position) with a backrest elevation of 10 degrees . MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Backrest elevation was measured continuously during the first week of ventilation with a monitor-linked device. A deviation of position was defined as a change of the randomized position >5 degrees . Diagnosis of VAP was made by quantitative cultures of samples obtained by bronchoscopic techniques. RESULTS: One hundred nine patients were assigned to the supine group and 112 to the semirecumbent group. Baseline characteristics were comparable for both groups. Average elevations were 9.8 degrees and 16.1 degrees at day 1 and day 7, respectively, for the supine group and 28.1 degrees and 22.6 degrees at day 1 and day 7, respectively, for the semirecumbent group (p < .001). The target semirecumbent position of 45 degrees was not achieved for 85% of the study time, and these patients more frequently changed position than supine-positioned patients. VAP was diagnosed in eight patients (6.5%) in the supine group and in 13 (10.7%) in the semirecumbent group (NS), after a mean of 6 (range, 3-9) and 7 (range, 3-12) days, respectively. There were no differences in numbers of patients undergoing enteral feeding, receiving stress ulcer prophylaxis, or developing pressure sores or in mortality rates or duration of ventilation and intensive care unit stay between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: The targeted backrest elevation of 45 degrees for semirecumbent positioning was not reached in the conditions of the present randomized study. The achieved difference in treatment position (28 degrees vs. 10 degrees ) did not prevent the development of VAP.

Meta-analysis of hemodynamic optimization: relationship to methodological quality.

INTRODUCTION: To review systematically the effect of interventions aimed at hemodynamic optimization and to relate this to the quality of individual published trials. METHODS: A systematic, computerized bibliographic search of published studies and citation reviews of relevant studies was performed. All randomized clinical trials in which adult patients were included in a trial deliberately aiming at an optimized or maximized hemodynamic condition of the patients (with oxygen delivery, cardiac index, oxygen consumption, mixed venous oxygen saturation and/or stroke volume as end-points) were selected. A total of 30 studies were selected for independent review. Two reviewers extracted data on population, intervention, outcome and methodological quality. Agreement between reviewers was high: differences were eventually resolved by third-party decision. The methodological quality of the studies was moderate (mean 9.0, SD 1.7), and the outcomes of the randomized clinical trials were not related to their quality. RESULTS: Efforts to achieve an optimized hemodynamic condition resulted in a decreased mortality rate (relative risk ratio (RR) 0.75 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.62 to 0.90) in all studies combined. This was due to a significantly decreased mortality in peri-operative intervention studies (RR 0.66 (95% CI 0.54 to 0.81). Overall, patients with sepsis and overt organ failure do not benefit from this method (RR 0.92 (95% CI 0.75 to 1.11)). CONCLUSION: This systematic review showed that interventions aimed at hemodynamic optimization reduced mortality. In particular, trials including peri-operative interventions aimed at the hemodynamic optimization of high-risk surgical patients reduce mortality. Overall, this effect was not related to the trial quality.