Dexmedetomidine or Propofol for Sedation in Mechanically Ventilated Adults with Sepsis.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines currently recommend targeting light sedation with dexmedetomidine or propofol for adults receiving mechanical ventilation. Differences exist between these sedatives in arousability, immunity, and inflammation. Whether they affect outcomes differentially in mechanically ventilated adults with sepsis undergoing light sedation is unknown. METHODS: In a multicenter, double-blind trial, we randomly assigned mechanically ventilated adults with sepsis to receive dexmedetomidine (0.2 to 1.5 µg per kilogram of body weight per hour) or propofol (5 to 50 µg per kilogram per minute), with doses adjusted by bedside nurses to achieve target sedation goals set by clinicians according to the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS, on which scores range from -5 [unresponsive] to +4 [combative]). The primary end point was days alive without delirium or coma during the 14-day intervention period. Secondary end points were ventilator-free days at 28 days, death at 90 days, and age-adjusted total score on the Telephone Interview for Cognitive Status questionnaire (TICS-T; scores range from 0 to 100, with a mean of 50±10 and lower scores indicating worse cognition) at 6 months. RESULTS: Of 432 patients who underwent randomization, 422 were assigned to receive a trial drug and were included in the analyses - 214 patients received dexmedetomidine at a median dose of 0.27 µg per kilogram per hour, and 208 received propofol at a median dose of 10.21 µg per kilogram per minute. The median duration of receipt of the trial drugs was 3.0 days (interquartile range, 2.0 to 6.0), and the median RASS score was -2.0 (interquartile range, -3.0 to -1.0). We found no difference between dexmedetomidine and propofol in the number of days alive without delirium or coma (adjusted median, 10.7 vs. 10.8 days; odds ratio, 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.74 to 1.26), ventilator-free days (adjusted median, 23.7 vs. 24.0 days; odds ratio, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.63 to 1.51), death at 90 days (38% vs. 39%; hazard ratio, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.52), or TICS-T score at 6 months (adjusted median score, 40.9 vs. 41.4; odds ratio, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.66 to 1.33). Safety end points were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among mechanically ventilated adults with sepsis who were being treated with recommended light-sedation approaches, outcomes in patients who received dexmedetomidine did not differ from outcomes in those who received propofol. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01739933.).

Ensifentrine, a Novel Phosphodiesterase 3 and 4 Inhibitor for the Treatment of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-controlled, Multicenter Phase III Trials (the ENHANCE Trials).

Rationale: Ensifentrine is a novel, selective, dual phosphodiesterase (PDE)3 and PDE4 inhibitor with bronchodilator and antiinflammatory effects. Replicate phase III trials of nebulized ensifentrine were conducted (ENHANCE-1 and ENHANCE-2) to assess these effects in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Objectives: To evaluate the efficacy of ensifentrine compared with placebo for lung function, symptoms, quality of life, and exacerbations in patients with COPD. Methods: These phase III, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled trials were conducted between September 2020 and December 2022 at 250 research centers and pulmonology practices in 17 countries. Patients aged 40-80 years with moderate to severe symptomatic COPD were enrolled. Measurements and Main Results: Totals of 760 (ENHANCE-1) and 789 (ENHANCE-2) patients were randomized and treated, with 69% and 55% receiving concomitant long-acting muscarinic antagonists or long-acting ß2-agonists, respectively. Post-bronchodilator FEV1 percentage predicted values were 52% and 51% of predicted normal. Ensifentrine treatment significantly improved average FEV1 area under the curve at 0-12 hours versus placebo (ENHANCE-1, 87 ml [95% confidence interval, 55, 119]; ENHANCE-2, 94 ml [65, 124]; both P < 0.001). Ensifentrine treatment significantly improved symptoms (Evaluating Respiratory Symptoms) and quality of life (St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire) versus placebo at Week 24 in ENHANCE-1 but not in ENHANCE-2. Ensifentrine treatment reduced the rate of moderate or severe exacerbations versus placebo over 24 weeks (ENHANCE-1, rate ratio, 0.64 [0.40, 1.00]; P = 0.050; ENHANCE-2, rate ratio, 0.57 [0.38, 0.87]; P = 0.009) and increased time to first exacerbation (ENHANCE-1, hazard ratio, 0.62 [0.39, 0.97]; P = 0.038; ENHANCE-2, hazard ratio, 0.58 [0.38, 0.87]; P = 0.009). Adverse event rates were similar to those for placebo. Conclusions: Ensifentrine significantly improved lung function in both trials, with results supporting exacerbation rate and risk reduction in a broad COPD population and in addition to other classes of maintenance therapies. Clinical trial registered with www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov and EudraCT (ENHANCE-1, www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov identifier NCT04535986, EudraCT identifier 2020-002086-34; ENHANCE-2, www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov identifier NCT04542057, EudraCT identifier 2020-002069-32).

In COPD with type 2 inflammation despite inhaled triple therapy, dupilumab safely reduced exacerbations.

SOURCE CITATION: Bhatt SP, Rabe KF, Hanania NA, et al; BOREAS Investigators. Dupilumab for COPD with type 2 inflammation indicated by eosinophil counts. N Engl J Med. 2023;389;205-214.37272521.

Air pollution and COPD: GOLD 2023 committee report.

Exposure to air pollution is a major contributor to the pathogenesis of COPD worldwide. Indeed, most recent estimates suggest that 50% of the total attributable risk of COPD may be related to air pollution. In response, the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) Scientific Committee performed a comprehensive review on this topic, qualitatively synthesised the evidence to date and proffered recommendations to mitigate the risk. The review found that both gaseous and particulate components of air pollution are likely contributors to COPD. There are no absolutely safe levels of ambient air pollution and the relationship between air pollution levels and respiratory events is supra-linear. Wildfires and extreme weather events such as heat waves, which are becoming more common owing to climate change, are major threats to COPD patients and acutely increase their risk of morbidity and mortality. Exposure to air pollution also impairs lung growth in children and as such may lead to developmental COPD. GOLD recommends strong public health policies around the world to reduce ambient air pollution and for implementation of public warning systems and advisories, including where possible the use of personalised apps, to alert patients when ambient air pollution levels exceed acceptable minimal thresholds. When household particulate content exceeds acceptable thresholds, patients should consider using air cleaners and filters where feasible. Air pollution is a major health threat to patients living with COPD and actions are urgently required to reduce the morbidity and mortality related to poor air quality around the world.

Use of thiols and implications for the use of inhaled corticosteroids in the presence of oxidative stress in COPD.

BACKGROUND: Oxidative stress and persistent airway inflammation are thought to be important contributors to the development of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This review summarizes the evidence for targeting oxidative stress and inflammation in patients with COPD with mucolytic/antioxidant thiols and inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), either alone or in combination. MAIN BODY: Oxidative stress is increased in COPD, particularly during acute exacerbations. It can be triggered by oxidant air pollutants and cigarette smoke and/or by endogenous reactive oxygen species (ROS) released from mitochondria and activated inflammatory, immune and epithelial cells in the airways, together with a reduction in endogenous antioxidants such as glutathione (GSH). Oxidative stress also drives chronic inflammation and disease progression in the airways by activating intracellular signalling pathways and the release of further inflammatory mediators. ICS are anti-inflammatory agents currently recommended for use with long-acting bronchodilators to prevent exacerbations in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD, especially those with eosinophilic airway inflammation. However, corticosteroids can also increase oxidative stress, which may in turn reduce corticosteroid sensitivity in patients by several mechanisms. Thiol-based agents such as erdosteine, N-acetyl L-cysteine (NAC) and S-carboxymethylcysteine (S-CMC) are mucolytic agents that also act as antioxidants. These agents may reduce oxidative stress directly through the free sulfhydryl groups, serving as a source of reducing equivalents and indirectly though intracellular GSH replenishment. Few studies have compared the effects of corticosteroids and thiol agents on oxidative stress, but there is some evidence for greater antioxidant effects when they are administered together. The current Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) report supports treatment with antioxidants (erdosteine, NAC, S-CMC) in addition to standard-of-care therapy as they have been demonstrated to reduce COPD exacerbations. However, such studies have demonstrated that NAC and S-CMC reduced the exacerbation risk only in patients not treated with ICS, whereas erdosteine reduced COPD exacerbations irrespective of concomitant ICS use suggesting that erdosteine has additional pharmacological actions to ICS. CONCLUSIONS: Further clinical trials of antioxidant agents with and without ICS are needed to better understand the place of thiol-based drugs in the treatment of patients with COPD.

Effectiveness of Beta-Lactam plus Doxycycline for Patients Hospitalized with Community-Acquired Pneumonia.

BACKGROUND: Despite clinical practice guideline recommendations to use doxycycline as part of combination therapy for some patients hospitalized with pneumonia, there is minimal evidence supporting this recommendation. Our aim was to examine the association between beta-lactam plus doxycycline and mortality for patients hospitalized with community-acquired pneumonia. METHODS: We identified patients >65 years of age admitted to any US Department of Veterans Affairs hospital in fiscal years 2002-2012 with a discharge diagnosis of pneumonia. We excluded those patients who did not receive antibiotic therapy concordant with the 2019 American Thoracic Society/Infectious Diseases Society of America (ATS/IDSA) clinical practice guidelines. Using propensity score matching, we examined the association of doxycycline with 30- and 90-day mortality. RESULTS: Our overall cohort was comprised of 70533 patients and 5282 (7.49%) received doxycycline. Unadjusted 30-day mortality was 6.4% for those who received a beta-lactam plus doxycycline versus 9.1% in those who did not (P < .0001), and 90-day mortality was 13.8% for those who received a beta-lactam + doxycycline versus 16.8% for those who did not (P < .0001). In the propensity score matched models, both 30- (odds ratio 0.72, 95% confidence interval [CI], .63-.84) and 90-day (0.83, 95% CI, .74-.92) mortality were significantly lower for those who received doxycycline. CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective observational cohort study, we found that doxycycline use, as part of guideline-concordant antibiotic therapy, was associated with lower 30- and 90-day mortality than regimens without doxycycline. While this supports the safety and effectiveness of antibiotic regimes that include doxycycline, additional studies, especially randomized clinical trials, are needed to confirm this.

Multicenter International Cohort Validation of a Modified Sequential Organ Failure Assessment Score Using the Richmond Agitation-sedation Scale.

OBJECTIVE: In a multicenter, international cohort, we aimed to validate a modified Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (mSOFA) using the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale, hypothesized as comparable to the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS)-based Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA). SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: The SOFA score, whose neurologic component is based on the GCS, can predict intensive care unit (ICU) mortality. But, GCS is often missing in lieu of other assessments, such as the also reliable and validated Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale (RASS). Single-center data suggested an RASS-based SOFA (mSOFA) predicted ICU mortality. METHODS: Our nested cohort within the prospective 2016 Fourth International Study of Mechanical Ventilation contains 4120 ventilated patients with daily RASS and GCS assessments (20,023 patient-days, 32 countries). We estimated GCS from RASS via a proportional odds model without adjustment. ICU mortality logistic regression models and c-statistics were constructed using SOFA (measured GCS) and mSOFA (measured RASS-estimated GCS), adjusted for age, sex, body-mass index, region (Europe, USA-Canada, Latin America, Africa, Asia, Australia-New Zealand), and postoperative status (medical/surgical). RESULTS: Cohort-wide, the mean SOFA=9.4+/-2.8 and mean mSOFA = 10.0+/-2.3, with ICU mortality = 31%. Mean SOFA and mSOFA similarly predicted ICU mortality (SOFA: AUC = 0.784, 95% CI = 0.769-0.799; mSOFA: AUC = 0.778, 95% CI = 0.763-0.793, P = 0.139). Across models, other predictors of mortality included higher age, female sex, medical patient, and African region (all P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: We present the first SOFA modification with RASS in a "real-world" international cohort. Estimating GCS from RASS preserves predictive validity of SOFA to predict ICU mortality. Alternative neurologic measurements like RASS can be viably integrated into severity of illness scoring systems like SOFA.

The acute effects of azithromycin use on cardiovascular mortality as compared with amoxicillin-clavulanate in US Veterans.

PURPOSE: Azithromycin is a common first-line antibiotic for respiratory infection; however, there is conflicting evidence regarding risk of cardiovascular death. We assessed cardiovascular and noncardiovascular mortality associated with azithromycin versus amoxicillin-clavulanate among US Veterans treated for nonear-nose-throat respiratory infection ("respiratory") or ear-nose-throat infection indication. METHODS: Electronic health record data from the US Veterans Health Administration database were used to identify Veterans (30-74 years) with outpatient dispensings of oral azithromycin versus amoxicillin-clavulanate for respiratory or ear-nose-throat infection (January 01, 2000-December 31, 2014). Outcomes assessed were risk of cardiovascular death and noncardiovascular death within 1-5 and 6-10 days postdispensing. Inverse probability of treatment-weighted proportional hazards models and binomial regression models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and compute risk differences (RD) per million courses of therapy. Cardiac death (subset of cardiovascular death) was assessed in sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: There were 629 345 azithromycin and 168 429 amoxicillin-clavulanate dispensings for respiratory indications, 143 783 azithromycin, and 203 142 amoxicillin-clavulanate dispensings for ear-nose-throat indications. For respiratory indications, azithromycin was not associated with a significantly different risk of cardiovascular death versus amoxicillin-clavulanate within 1-5 days postdispensing (HR [95% confidence interval (CI)]: 1.12 [0.63, 2.00]; RD [95% CI]: 11 [-43, 64] deaths/million courses of therapy). No elevated risk for azithromycin was found for ear-nose-throat indications. Pooled results for both indications via meta-analysis showed no association between antibiotics and cardiovascular mortality. There was no significant difference in risk of noncardiovascular or cardiac death between antibiotics postdispensing. CONCLUSION: Azithromycin was not associated with elevated risk of cardiovascular or noncardiovascular death versus amoxicillin-clavulanate among US Veterans.

Global Initiative for the Diagnosis, Management, and Prevention of Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease. The 2020 GOLD Science Committee Report on COVID-19 and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has raised many questions about the management of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and whether modifications of their therapy are required. It has raised questions about recognizing and differentiating coronavirus disease (COVID-19) from COPD given the similarity of the symptoms. The Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) Science Committee used established methods for literature review to present an overview of the management of patients with COPD during the COVID-19 pandemic. It is unclear whether patients with COPD are at increased risk of becoming infected with SARS-CoV-2. During periods of high community prevalence of COVID-19, spirometry should only be used when it is essential for COPD diagnosis and/or to assess lung function status for interventional procedures or surgery. Patients with COPD should follow basic infection control measures, including social distancing, hand washing, and wearing a mask or face covering. Patients should remain up to date with appropriate vaccinations, particularly annual influenza vaccination. Although data are limited, inhaled corticosteroids, long-acting bronchodilators, roflumilast, or chronic macrolides should continue to be used as indicated for stable COPD management. Systemic steroids and antibiotics should be used in COPD exacerbations according to the usual indications. Differentiating symptoms of COVID-19 infection from chronic underlying symptoms or those of an acute COPD exacerbation may be challenging. If there is suspicion for COVID-19, testing for SARS-CoV-2 should be considered. Patients who developed moderate-to-severe COVID-19, including hospitalization and pneumonia, should be treated with evolving pharmacotherapeutic approaches as appropriate, including remdesivir, dexamethasone, and anticoagulation. Managing acute respiratory failure should include appropriate oxygen supplementation, prone positioning, noninvasive ventilation, and protective lung strategy in patients with COPD and severe acute respiratory distress syndrome. Patients who developed asymptomatic or mild COVID-19 should be followed with the usual COPD protocols. Patients who developed moderate or worse COVID-19 should be monitored more frequently and accurately than the usual patients with COPD, with particular attention to the need for oxygen therapy.

Weaning Outcomes in Patients with Brain Injury.

BACKGROUND: Despite the need for specific weaning strategies in neurological patients, evidence is generally insufficient or lacking. We aimed to describe the evolution over time of weaning and extubation practices in patients with acute brain injury compared with patients who are mechanically ventilated (MV) due to other reasons. METHODS: We performed a secondary analysis of three prospective, observational, multicenter international studies conducted in 2004, 2010, and 2016 in adults who had need of invasive MV for more than 12 h. We collected data on baseline characteristics, variables related to management ventilator settings, and complications while patients were ventilated or until day 28. RESULTS: Among the 20,929 patients enrolled, we included 12,618 (60%) who started the weaning from MV, of whom 1722 (14%) were patients with acute brain injury. In the acutely brain-injured cohort, 538 patients (31%) did not undergo planned extubation, defined as the need for a tracheostomy without an attempt of extubation, accidental extubation, and death. Among the 1184 planned extubated patients with acute brain injury, 202 required reintubation (17%). Patients with acute brain injury had a higher odds for unplanned extubation (odds ratio [OR] 1.35, confidence interval for 95% [CI 95%] 1.19-1.54; p < 0.001), a higher odds of failure after the first attempt of weaning (spontaneous breathing trial or gradual reduction of ventilatory support; OR 1.14 [CI 95% 1.01-1.30; p = 0.03]), and a higher odds for reintubation (OR 1.41 [CI 95% 1.20-1.66; p < 0.001]) than patients without brain injury. Patients with hemorrhagic stroke had the highest odds for unplanned extubation (OR 1.47 [CI 95% 1.22-1.77; p < 0.001]), of failed extubation after the first attempt of weaning (OR 1.28 [CI 95% 1.06-1.55; p = 0.009]), and for reintubation (OR 1.49 [CI 95% 1.17-1.88; p < 0.001]). In relation to weaning evolution over time in patients with acute brain injury, the risk for unplanned extubation showed a downward trend; the risk for reintubation was not associated to time; and there was a significant increase in the percentage of patients who underwent extubation after the first attempt of weaning from MV. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with acute brain injury, compared with patients without brain injury, present higher odds of undergoing unplanned extubated after weaning was started, lower odds of being extubated after the first attempt, and a higher risk of reintubation.

Immunologic resilience and COVID-19 survival advantage.

BACKGROUND: The risk of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) varies significantly among persons of similar age and is higher in males. Age-independent, sex-biased differences in susceptibility to severe COVID-19 may be ascribable to deficits in a sexually dimorphic protective attribute that we termed immunologic resilience (IR). OBJECTIVE: We sought to examine whether deficits in IR that antedate or are induced by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection independently predict COVID-19 mortality. METHODS: IR levels were quantified with 2 novel metrics: immune health grades (IHG-I [best] to IHG-IV) to gauge CD8+ and CD4+ T-cell count equilibrium, and blood gene expression signatures. IR metrics were examined in a prospective COVID-19 cohort (n = 522); primary outcome was 30-day mortality. Associations of IR metrics with outcomes in non-COVID-19 cohorts (n = 13,461) provided the framework for linking pre-COVID-19 IR status to IR during COVID-19, as well as to COVID-19 outcomes. RESULTS: IHG-I, tracking high-grade equilibrium between CD8+ and CD4+ T-cell counts, was the most common grade (73%) among healthy adults, particularly in females. SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with underrepresentation of IHG-I (21%) versus overrepresentation (77%) of IHG-II or IHG-IV, especially in males versus females (P < .01). Presentation with IHG-I was associated with 88% lower mortality, after controlling for age and sex; reduced risk of hospitalization and respiratory failure; lower plasma IL-6 levels; rapid clearance of nasopharyngeal SARS-CoV-2 burden; and gene expression signatures correlating with survival that signify immunocompetence and controlled inflammation. In non-COVID-19 cohorts, IR-preserving metrics were associated with resistance to progressive influenza or HIV infection, as well as lower 9-year mortality in the Framingham Heart Study, especially in females. CONCLUSIONS: Preservation of immunocompetence with controlled inflammation during antigenic challenges is a hallmark of IR and associates with longevity and AIDS resistance. Independent of age, a male-biased proclivity to degrade IR before and/or during SARS-CoV-2 infection predisposes to severe COVID-19.

Small Airway Disease and Emphysema Are Associated with Future Exacerbations in Smokers with CT-derived Bronchiectasis and COPD: Results from the COPDGene Cohort.

Background Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and bronchiectasis can overlap and share pathologic features, such as small airway disease (SAD). Whether the presence of SAD and emphysema in smokers with CT-derived bronchiectasis is associated with exacerbations is unknown. Purpose To assess whether SAD and emphysema in smokers with CT-derived bronchiectasis are associated with future exacerbations. Materials and Methods SAD and emphysema were quantified using the parametric response map method in former and current heavy smokers with and without bronchiectasis at CT from the COPDGene Study (from July 2009 to July 2018). Exacerbations were prospectively assessed through biannual follow-up. An exacerbation was defined as an increase in or new onset of respiratory symptoms treated with antibiotics and/or corticosteroids. Severe exacerbations were defined as those that required hospitalization. The association of a high burden of SAD (≥15.6%) and high burden of emphysema (≥5%) at CT with exacerbations was assessed with generalized linear mixed models. Results Of 737 participants, 387 (median age, 64 years [interquartile range, 58-71 years]; 223 women) had CT-derived bronchiectasis. During a 9-year follow-up, after adjustment for age, sex, race, body mass index, current smoking status, pack-years, exacerbations before study entry, forced expiratory volume in 1 second, or FEV1, and bronchiectasis severity CT score, high burden of SAD and high burden of emphysema were associated with a higher number of exacerbations per year (relative risk [RR], 1.89 [95% CI: 1.54, 2.33] and 1.37 [95% CI: 1.13, 1.66], respectively; P ≤ .001 for both). Results were comparable among participants with bronchiectasis meeting criteria for COPD (n = 197) (RR, 1.67 [95% CI: 1.23, 2.27] for high burden of SAD and 1.51 [95% CI: 1.20, 1.91] for high burden of emphysema; P ≤ .001 for both). Conclusion In smokers with CT-derived bronchiectasis and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, structural damage to lung parenchyma and small airways was associated with a higher number of exacerbations per year. Clinical trial registration no. NCT00608764 © RSNA, 2021.

Evolution Over Time of Ventilatory Management and Outcome of Patients With Neurologic Disease.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the changes in ventilator management over time in patients with neurologic disease at ICU admission and to estimate factors associated with 28-day hospital mortality. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of three prospective, observational, multicenter studies. SETTING: Cohort studies conducted in 2004, 2010, and 2016. PATIENTS: Adult patients who received mechanical ventilation for more than 12 hours. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Among the 20,929 patients enrolled, we included 4,152 (20%) mechanically ventilated patients due to different neurologic diseases. Hemorrhagic stroke and brain trauma were the most common pathologies associated with the need for mechanical ventilation. Although volume-cycled ventilation remained the preferred ventilation mode, there was a significant (p < 0.001) increment in the use of pressure support ventilation. The proportion of patients receiving a protective lung ventilation strategy was increased over time: 47% in 2004, 63% in 2010, and 65% in 2016 (p < 0.001), as well as the duration of protective ventilation strategies: 406 days per 1,000 mechanical ventilation days in 2004, 523 days per 1,000 mechanical ventilation days in 2010, and 585 days per 1,000 mechanical ventilation days in 2016 (p < 0.001). There were no differences in the length of stay in the ICU, mortality in the ICU, and mortality in hospital from 2004 to 2016. Independent risk factors for 28-day mortality were age greater than 75 years, Simplified Acute Physiology Score II greater than 50, the occurrence of organ dysfunction within first 48 hours after brain injury, and specific neurologic diseases such as hemorrhagic stroke, ischemic stroke, and brain trauma. CONCLUSIONS: More lung-protective ventilatory strategies have been implemented over years in neurologic patients with no effect on pulmonary complications or on survival. We found several prognostic factors on mortality such as advanced age, the severity of the disease, organ dysfunctions, and the etiology of neurologic disease.

Machine learning predicts mortality based on analysis of ventilation parameters of critically ill patients: multi-centre validation.

BACKGROUND: Mechanical Ventilation (MV) is a complex and central treatment process in the care of critically ill patients. It influences acid-base balance and can also cause prognostically relevant biotrauma by generating forces and liberating reactive oxygen species, negatively affecting outcomes. In this work we evaluate the use of a Recurrent Neural Network (RNN) modelling to predict outcomes of mechanically ventilated patients, using standard mechanical ventilation parameters. METHODS: We performed our analysis on VENTILA dataset, an observational, prospective, international, multi-centre study, performed to investigate the effect of baseline characteristics and management changes over time on the all-cause mortality rate in mechanically ventilated patients in ICU. Our cohort includes 12,596 adult patients older than 18, associated with 12,755 distinct admissions in ICUs across 37 countries and receiving invasive and non-invasive mechanical ventilation. We carry out four different analysis. Initially we select typical mechanical ventilation parameters and evaluate the machine learning model on both, the overall cohort and a subgroup of patients admitted with respiratory disorders. Furthermore, we carry out sensitivity analysis to evaluate whether inclusion of variables related to the function of other organs, improve the predictive performance of the model for both the overall cohort as well as the subgroup of patients with respiratory disorders. RESULTS: Predictive performance of RNN-based model was higher with Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) Curve (AUC) of 0.72 (± 0.01) and Average Precision (AP) of 0.57 (± 0.01) in comparison to RF and LR for the overall patient dataset. Higher predictive performance was recorded in the subgroup of patients admitted with respiratory disorders with AUC of 0.75 (± 0.02) and AP of 0.65 (± 0.03). Inclusion of function of other organs further improved the performance to AUC of 0.79 (± 0.01) and AP 0.68 (± 0.02) for the overall patient dataset and AUC of 0.79 (± 0.01) and AP 0.72 (± 0.02) for the subgroup with respiratory disorders. CONCLUSION: The RNN-based model demonstrated better performance than RF and LR in patients in mechanical ventilation and its subgroup admitted with respiratory disorders. Clinical studies are needed to evaluate whether it impacts decision-making and patient outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02731898 ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02731898 ), prospectively registered on April 8, 2016.

Tiotropium in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease - a review of clinical development.

BACKGROUND: Bronchodilators are the mainstay of pharmacological treatment in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) monotherapy is recommended as initial treatment for Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) groups B, C, and D. MAIN BODY: Tiotropium bromide was the first LAMA available for COPD in clinical practice and, because of its long duration of action, is administered once daily. Tiotropium was initially available as an inhalation powder delivered via a dry-powder inhaler (DPI). Later, tiotropium also became available as an inhalation spray delivered via a soft mist inhaler (SMI). The SMI was designed to overcome or minimize some of the issues associated with other inhaler types (eg, the need for strong inspiratory airflow with DPIs). Results of short- and long-term randomized, controlled clinical trials of tiotropium in patients with COPD indicated tiotropium was safe and significantly improved lung function, health-related quality of life, and exercise endurance, and reduced dyspnea, lung hyperinflation, exacerbations, and use of rescue medication compared with placebo or active comparators. These positive efficacy findings triggered the evaluation of tiotropium in fixed-dose combination with olodaterol (a long-acting ß2-agonist). In this review, we provide an overview of studies of tiotropium for the treatment of COPD, with a focus on pivotal studies. CONCLUSION: Tiotropium is safe and efficacious as a long-term, once-daily LAMA for the maintenance treatment of COPD and for reducing COPD exacerbations. The SMI generates a low-velocity, long-duration aerosol spray with a high fine-particle fraction, which results in marked lung drug deposition. In addition, high inspiratory flow rates are not required.

Diagnosis and Treatment of Adults with Community-acquired Pneumonia. An Official Clinical Practice Guideline of the American Thoracic Society and Infectious Diseases Society of America.

Background: This document provides evidence-based clinical practice guidelines on the management of adult patients with community-acquired pneumonia.Methods: A multidisciplinary panel conducted pragmatic systematic reviews of the relevant research and applied Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology for clinical recommendations.Results: The panel addressed 16 specific areas for recommendations spanning questions of diagnostic testing, determination of site of care, selection of initial empiric antibiotic therapy, and subsequent management decisions. Although some recommendations remain unchanged from the 2007 guideline, the availability of results from new therapeutic trials and epidemiological investigations led to revised recommendations for empiric treatment strategies and additional management decisions.Conclusions: The panel formulated and provided the rationale for recommendations on selected diagnostic and treatment strategies for adult patients with community-acquired pneumonia.

Global Strategy for the Diagnosis, Management, and Prevention of Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease: the GOLD science committee report 2019.

Precision medicine is a patient-specific approach that integrates all relevant clinical, genetic and biological information in order to optimise the therapeutic benefit relative to the possibility of side-effects for each individual. Recent clinical trials have shown that higher blood eosinophil counts are associated with a greater efficacy of inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients. Blood eosinophil counts are a biomarker with potential to be used in clinical practice, to help target ICS treatment with more precision in COPD patients with a history of exacerbations despite appropriate bronchodilator treatment.The Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) 2017 pharmacological treatment algorithms, based on the ABCD assessment, can be applied relatively easily to treatment-naive individuals at initial presentation. However, their use is more problematic during follow-up in patients who are already on maintenance treatment. There is a need for a different system to guide COPD pharmacological management during follow-up.Recent large randomised controlled trials have provided important new information concerning the therapeutic effects of ICSs and long-acting bronchodilators on exacerbations. The new evidence regarding blood eosinophils and inhaled treatments, and the need to distinguish between initial and follow-up pharmacological management, led to changes in the GOLD pharmacological treatment recommendations. This article explains the evidence and rationale for the GOLD 2019 pharmacological treatment recommendations.

Determinants of Response to Roflumilast in Severe Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. Pooled Analysis of Two Randomized Trials.

RATIONALE: Roflumilast reduces exacerbations in patients with severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease associated with chronic bronchitis and a history of exacerbations. Further characterization of patients most likely to benefit is warranted. OBJECTIVES: Define characteristics that most robustly identify patients who derive greatest exacerbation risk reduction with roflumilast. METHODS: Predefined, pooled analyses of REACT (Roflumilast in the Prevention of COPD Exacerbations While Taking Appropriate Combination Treatment; NCT01329029) and RE2SPOND (Roflumilast Effect on Exacerbations in Patients on Dual [LABA/ICS] Therapy; NCT01443845) multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies. The primary endpoint was rate of moderate or severe exacerbations per patient per year. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: In the overall intention-to-treat population (n = 4,287), roflumilast reduced moderate or severe exacerbations by 12.3% (rate ratio, 0.88, 95% confidence interval, 0.80-0.97; P = 0.0086) and severe exacerbations by 16.1% (0.84; 0.71-0.99; P = 0.0409) versus placebo. The reduction in moderate or severe exacerbations with roflumilast was most pronounced in patients who had been hospitalized for an exacerbation in the prior year (0.74; 0.63-0.88; P = 0.0005); had more than two exacerbations in the prior year (0.79; 0.65-0.96; P = 0.0160); or had baseline eosinophils ≥150 cells/µl (0.81; 0.71-0.93; P = 0.0020), ≥150 to <300 cells/µl (0.84; 0.71-0.98; P = 0.0282), or ≥300 cells/µl (0.77; 0.61-0.97; P = 0.0264). Similar subgroup results were noted for severe exacerbations. In patients with prior hospitalization and higher baseline blood eosinophil concentrations, roflumilast reduced moderate or severe exacerbations by 34.5% at ≥150 cells/µl (0.65; 0.52-0.82; P = 0.0003) and 42.7% at ≥300 cells/µl (0.57; 0.37-0.88; P = 0.0111) versus placebo. CONCLUSIONS: This prespecified, pooled analysis confirms the benefit of roflumilast in decreasing exacerbations in patients with prior hospitalization for exacerbation, greater exacerbation frequency, and higher (≥150 cells/µl, ≥150 to <300 cells/µl, or ≥300 cells/µl) baseline blood eosinophil count.