Prophylactic Intra-Aortic Balloon Counterpulsation in High Risk Cardiac Surgery: The PINBALL Pilot Multicentre, Registry-Linked, Randomised, Controlled Feasibility Trial.

BACKGROUND: Prophylactic intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation (IABC) is commonly used in selected patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery, but definitive evidence is lacking. The aim of the multicentre PINBALL Pilot randomised controlled trial (RCT) was to assess the feasibility of performing a definitive trial to address this question. METHODS: Patients listed for CABG surgery with impaired left ventricular function and at least one additional risk factor for postoperative low cardiac output syndrome were eligible for inclusion if the treating surgical team was uncertain as to the benefit of prophylactic IABC. The primary outcome of feasibility was based on exceeding a pre-specified recruitment rate, protocol compliance and follow-up. RESULTS: The recruitment rate of 0.5 participants per site per month did not meet the feasibility threshold of two participants per site per month and the study was stopped early after enrolment of 24 out of the planned sample size of 40 participants. For 20/24 (83%) participants, preoperative IABC use occurred according to study assignment. Six (6)-month follow-up was available for all enrolled participants, [IABC 1 death (8%) vs. control 1 death (9%), p = 0.95]. CONCLUSION: The PINBALL Pilot recruitment rate was insufficient to demonstrate feasibility of a multicentre RCT of prophylactic IABC in high risk patients undergoing CABG surgery.

Validation of a classification system for causes of death in critical care: an assessment of inter-rater reliability.

OBJECTIVE: Trials in critical care have previously used unvalidated systems to classify cause of death. We aimed to provide initial validation of a method to classify cause of death in intensive care unit patients. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: One hundred case scenarios of patients who died in an ICU were presented online to raters, who were asked to select a proximate and an underlying cause of death for each, using the ICU Deaths Classification and Reason (ICU-DECLARE) system. We evaluated two methods of categorising proximate cause of death (designated Lists A and B) and one method of categorising underlying cause of death. Raters were ICU specialists and research coordinators from Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Inter-rater reliability, as measured by the Fleiss multirater kappa, and the median proportion of raters choosing the most likely diagnosis (defined as the most popular classification choice in each case). RESULTS: Across all raters and cases, for proximate cause of death List A, kappa was 0.54 (95% CI, 0.49-0.60), and for proximate cause of death List B, kappa was 0.58 (95% CI, 0.53-0.63). For the underlying cause of death, kappa was 0.48 (95% CI, 0.44-0.53). The median proportion of raters choosing the most likely diagnosis for proximate cause of death, List A, was 77.5% (interquartile range [IQR], 60.0%-93.8%), and the median proportion choosing the most likely diagnosis for proximate cause of death, List B, was 82.5% (IQR, 60.0%-92.5%). The median proportion choosing the most likely diagnosis for underlying cause was 65.0% (IQR, 50.0%-81.3%). Kappa and median agreement were similar between countries. ICU specialists showed higher kappa and median agreement than research coordinators. CONCLUSIONS: The ICU-DECLARE system allowed ICU doctors to classify the proximate cause of death of patients who died in the ICU with substantial reliability.