Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 121
Filtrar
Más filtros

Banco de datos
Tipo del documento
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
N Engl J Med ; 2024 Jun 14.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38875111

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Whether proton-pump inhibitors are beneficial or harmful for stress ulcer prophylaxis in critically ill patients undergoing invasive ventilation is unclear. METHODS: In this international, randomized trial, we assigned critically ill adults who were undergoing invasive ventilation to receive intravenous pantoprazole (at a dose of 40 mg daily) or matching placebo. The primary efficacy outcome was clinically important upper gastrointestinal bleeding in the intensive care unit (ICU) at 90 days, and the primary safety outcome was death from any cause at 90 days. Multiplicity-adjusted key secondary outcomes were ventilator-associated pneumonia, Clostridioides difficile infection, and patient-important bleeding. RESULTS: A total of 4821 patients underwent randomization in 68 ICUs. Clinically important upper gastrointestinal bleeding occurred in 25 of 2385 patients (1.0%) receiving pantoprazole and in 84 of 2377 patients (3.5%) receiving placebo (hazard ratio, 0.30; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.19 to 0.47; P<0.001). At 90 days, death was reported in 696 of 2390 patients (29.1%) in the pantoprazole group and in 734 of 2379 patients (30.9%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.85 to 1.04; P = 0.25). Patient-important bleeding was reduced with pantoprazole; all other key secondary outcomes were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients undergoing invasive ventilation, pantoprazole resulted in a significantly lower risk of clinically important upper gastrointestinal bleeding than placebo, with no significant effect on mortality. (Funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and others; REVISE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03374800.).

2.
Crit Care Med ; 2024 Apr 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38557802

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: To derive a pooled estimate of the incidence and outcomes of sepsis-associated acute kidney injury (SA-AKI) in ICU patients and to explore the impact of differing definitions of SA-AKI on these estimates. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Medline Epub, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL between 1990 and 2023. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized clinical trials and prospective cohort studies of adults admitted to the ICU with either sepsis and/or SA-AKI. DATA EXTRACTION: Data were extracted in duplicate. Risk of bias was assessed using adapted standard tools. Data were pooled using a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed by using a single covariate logistic regression model. The primary outcome was the proportion of participants in ICU with sepsis who developed AKI. DATA SYNTHESIS: A total of 189 studies met inclusion criteria. One hundred fifty-four reported an incidence of SA-AKI, including 150,978 participants. The pooled proportion of patients who developed SA-AKI across all definitions was 0.40 (95% CI, 0.37-0.42) and 0.52 (95% CI, 0.48-0.56) when only the Risk Injury Failure Loss End-Stage, Acute Kidney Injury Network, and Improving Global Outcomes definitions were used to define SA-AKI. There was significant variation in the incidence of SA-AKI depending on the definition of AKI used and whether AKI defined by urine output criteria was included; the incidence was lowest when receipt of renal replacement therapy was used to define AKI (0.26; 95% CI, 0.24-0.28), and highest when the Acute Kidney Injury Network score was used (0.57; 95% CI, 0.45-0.69; p < 0.01). Sixty-seven studies including 29,455 participants reported at least one SA-AKI outcome. At final follow-up, the proportion of patients with SA-AKI who had died was 0.48 (95% CI, 0.43-0.53), and the proportion of surviving patients who remained on dialysis was 0.10 (95% CI, 0.04-0.17). CONCLUSIONS: SA-AKI is common in ICU patients with sepsis and carries a high risk of death and persisting kidney impairment. The incidence and outcomes of SA-AKI vary significantly depending on the definition of AKI used.

3.
Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care ; 27(2): 178-183, 2024 03 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38126191

RESUMEN

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To evaluate recent evidence (2021-2023) on fluid therapy in diabetic ketoacidosis. Key evidence gaps which require generation of new evidence are discussed. RECENT FINDINGS: Balanced crystalloid solutions, compared to the commonly recommended and used 0.9% sodium chloride solution (saline), may result in better outcomes for patients with diabetic ketoacidosis, including faster resolution of acidosis, less hyperchloremia and shorter hospital length of stay. Upcoming results from randomized trials may provide definitive evidence on the use of balanced crystalloid solutions in diabetic ketoacidosis. Evidence remains scarce or conflicting for the use of "two-bag" compared to conventional "one-bag" fluid, and rates of fluid administration, especially for adult patients. In children, concerns about cerebral oedema from faster fluid administration rates have not been demonstrated in cohort studies nor randomized trials. SUMMARY: Fluid therapy is a key aspect of diabetic ketoacidosis management, with important evidence gaps persisting for several aspects of management despite recent evidence.


Asunto(s)
Diabetes Mellitus , Cetoacidosis Diabética , Niño , Humanos , Cetoacidosis Diabética/terapia , Fluidoterapia/métodos , Solución Salina
4.
Acta Anaesthesiol Scand ; 68(6): 821-829, 2024 Jul.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38549422

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Critically ill patients in intensive care units (ICU) are frequently administered broad-spectrum antibiotics (e.g., carbapenems or piperacillin/tazobactam) for suspected or confirmed infections. This retrospective cohort study aimed to describe the use of carbapenems and piperacillin/tazobactam in two international, prospectively collected datasets. METHODS: We conducted a post hoc analysis of data from the "Adjunctive Glucocorticoid Therapy in Patients with Septic Shock" (ADRENAL) trial (n = 3713) and the "Antimicrobial de-escalation in the critically ill patient and assessment of clinical cure" (DIANA) study (n = 1488). The primary outcome was the proportion of patients receiving initial antibiotic treatment with carbapenems and piperacillin/tazobactam. Secondary outcomes included mortality, days alive and out of ICU and ICU length of stay at 28 days. RESULTS: In the ADRENAL trial, carbapenems were used in 648 out of 3713 (17%), whereas piperacillin/tazobactam was used in 1804 out of 3713 (49%) participants. In the DIANA study, carbapenems were used in 380 out of 1480 (26%), while piperacillin/tazobactam was used in 433 out of 1488 (29%) participants. Mortality at 28 days was 23% for patients receiving carbapenems and 24% for those receiving piperacillin/tazobactam in ADRENAL and 23% and 19%, respectively, in DIANA. We noted variations in secondary outcomes; in DIANA, patients receiving carbapenems had a median of 13 days alive and out of ICU compared with 18 days among those receiving piperacillin/tazobactam. In ADRENAL, the median hospital length of stay was 27 days for patients receiving carbapenems and 21 days for those receiving piperacillin/tazobactam. CONCLUSIONS: In this post hoc analysis of ICU patients with infections, we found widespread initial use of carbapenems and piperacillin/tazobactam in international ICUs, with the latter being more frequently used. Randomized clinical trials are needed to assess if the observed variations in outcomes may be drug-related effects or due to confounders.


Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos , Carbapenémicos , Combinación Piperacilina y Tazobactam , Humanos , Combinación Piperacilina y Tazobactam/uso terapéutico , Carbapenémicos/uso terapéutico , Estudios Retrospectivos , Femenino , Masculino , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano , Estudios de Cohortes , Cuidados Críticos , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , Tiempo de Internación/estadística & datos numéricos , Enfermedad Crítica
5.
Acta Anaesthesiol Scand ; 68(2): 146-166, 2024 Feb.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37881881

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The optimal dose of dexamethasone for severe/critical COVID-19 is uncertain. We compared higher versus standard doses of dexamethasone in adults with COVID-19 and hypoxia. METHODS: We searched PubMed and trial registers until 23 June 2023 for randomised clinical trials comparing higher (>6 mg) versus standard doses (6 mg) of dexamethasone in adults with COVID-19 and hypoxia. The primary outcome was mortality at 1 month. Secondary outcomes were mortality closest to 90 days; days alive without life support; and the occurrence of serious adverse events/reactions (SAEs/SARs) closest to 1 month. We assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane RoB2 tool, risk of random errors using trial sequential analysis, and certainty of evidence using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). RESULTS: We included eight trials (2478 participants), of which four (1293 participants) had low risk of bias. Higher doses of dexamethasone probably resulted in little to no difference in mortality at 1 month (relative risk [RR] 0.97, 95% CI: 0.79-1.19), mortality closest to Day 90 (RR 1.01, 95% CI: 0.86-1.20), and SAEs/SARs (RR 1.00, 95% CI: 0.97-1.02). Higher doses of dexamethasone probably increased the number of days alive without invasive mechanical ventilation and circulatory support but had no effect on days alive without renal replacement therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Based on low to moderate certainty evidence, higher versus standard doses of dexamethasone probably result in little to no difference in mortality, SAEs/SARs, and days alive without renal replacement therapy, but probably increase the number of days alive without invasive mechanical ventilation and circulatory support.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Adulto , Humanos , Tratamiento Farmacológico de COVID-19 , Pacientes , Dexametasona/efectos adversos , Hipoxia
6.
JAMA ; 2024 Jun 12.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38865154

RESUMEN

Importance: Severe pulmonary infections, including COVID-19, community-acquired pneumonia, influenza, and Pneumocystis pneumonia, are a leading cause of death among adults worldwide. Pulmonary infections in critically ill patients may cause septic shock, acute respiratory distress syndrome, or both, which are associated with mortality rates ranging between 30% and 50%. Observations: Corticosteroids mitigate the immune response to infection and improve outcomes for patients with several types of severe pulmonary infections. Low-dose corticosteroids, defined as less than or equal to 400 mg hydrocortisone equivalent daily, can reduce mortality of patients with severe COVID-19, community-acquired pneumonia, and Pneumocystis pneumonia. A randomized clinical trial of 6425 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 who required supplemental oxygen or noninvasive or invasive mechanical ventilation reported that dexamethasone 6 mg daily for 10 days decreased 28-day mortality (23% vs 26%). A meta-analysis that included 7 randomized clinical trials of 1689 patients treated in the intensive care unit for severe bacterial community-acquired pneumonia reported that hydrocortisone equivalent less than or equal to 400 mg daily for 8 days or fewer was associated with lower 30-day mortality compared with placebo (10% vs 16%). In a meta-analysis of 6 randomized clinical trials, low-dose corticosteroids were associated with lower mortality rates compared with placebo for patients with HIV and moderate to severe Pneumocystis pneumonia (13% vs 25%). In a predefined subgroup analysis of a trial of low-dose steroid treatment for septic shock, patients with community-acquired pneumonia randomized to 7 days of intravenous hydrocortisone 50 mg every 6 hours and fludrocortisone 50 µg daily had decreased mortality compared with the placebo group (39% vs 51%). For patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome caused by various conditions, low-dose corticosteroids were associated with decreased in-hospital mortality (34% vs 45%) according to a meta-analysis of 8 studies that included 1091 patients. Adverse effects of low-dose corticosteroids may include hyperglycemia, gastrointestinal bleeding, neuropsychiatric disorders, muscle weakness, hypernatremia, and secondary infections. Conclusions and Relevance: Treatment with low-dose corticosteroids is associated with decreased mortality for patients with severe COVID-19 infection, severe community-acquired bacterial pneumonia, and moderate to severe Pneumocystis pneumonia (for patients with HIV). Low-dose corticosteroids may also benefit critically ill patients with respiratory infections who have septic shock, acute respiratory distress syndrome, or both.

7.
Immunol Cell Biol ; 101(6): 535-544, 2023 Jul.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36468797

RESUMEN

Sepsis is a global health priority, yet effective host-directed targeted therapies have not been identified outside of the setting of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Lymphopenia occurs in up to ~52% of patients with sepsis and is associated with a higher mortality at both 30 and 100 days. In COVID-19, the presence of lymphopenia correlates with intensive care unit admission, acute respiratory distress syndrome and death. The mechanisms underpinning lymphopenic sepsis remain unknown, and while high rates of lymphocyte apoptosis have been implicated, the relative contributions of cellular trafficking to inflamed tissues and reduction in lymphopoiesis require investigation. Further delineation of these underlying mechanisms holds the potential to open new avenues for the development of host-directed therapies in lymphopenic sepsis. These may include recombinant cytokines (e.g. interleukin-7), monoclonal antibodies (e.g. anti-interleukin-1, anti-programmed cell death protein 1) and small interfering RNA (e.g. targeting interleukin-10, transforming growth factor beta). Applying the frontier tools of translational cellular and genomic medicine to understand lymphopenia in the setting of critical infections holds the potential to significantly reduce the excessive global burden of sepsis.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Síndromes de Inmunodeficiencia , Linfopenia , Sepsis , Humanos , COVID-19/complicaciones , Linfopenia/complicaciones , Sepsis/complicaciones , Anticuerpos Monoclonales
8.
Acta Anaesthesiol Scand ; 67(2): 195-205, 2023 Feb.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36314057

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Corticosteroids improve outcomes in patients with severe COVID-19. In the COVID STEROID 2 randomised clinical trial, we found high probabilities of benefit with dexamethasone 12 versus 6 mg daily. While no statistically significant heterogeneity in treatment effects (HTE) was found in the conventional, dichotomous subgroup analyses, these analyses have limitations, and HTE could still exist. METHODS: We assessed whether HTE was present for days alive without life support and mortality at Day 90 in the trial according to baseline age, weight, number of comorbidities, category of respiratory failure (type of respiratory support system and oxygen requirements) and predicted risk of mortality using an internal prediction model. We used flexible models for continuous variables and logistic regressions for categorical variables without dichotomisation of the baseline variables of interest. HTE was assessed both visually and with p and S values from likelihood ratio tests. RESULTS: There was no strong evidence for substantial HTE on either outcome according to any of the baseline variables assessed with all p values >.37 (and all S values <1.43) in the planned analyses and no convincingly strong visual indications of HTE. CONCLUSIONS: We found no strong evidence for HTE with 12 versus 6 mg dexamethasone daily on days alive without life support or mortality at Day 90 in patients with COVID-19 and severe hypoxaemia, although these results cannot rule out HTE either.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Humanos , Tratamiento Farmacológico de COVID-19 , Dexametasona/uso terapéutico , Hipoxia/tratamiento farmacológico , Esteroides
9.
Clin Trials ; 19(6): 673-680, 2022 12.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36068946

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND/AIMS: To summarise the temporal trends of recruitment and methodological characteristics of critical care randomised controlled trials with the primary outcome of mortality. METHODS: PubMed was searched for articles meeting inclusion and exclusion criteria. Randomised controlled trials, with primary outcome of mortality, of adult and paediatric critical care patients treated in an intensive care unit, were included. Neonatal intensive care unit trials, non-English publications and conference proceedings or abstracts without full-length publications were excluded. Duplicate literature search, article selection and quality assessment were performed by two reviewers with disputes resolved through discussion. Data were extracted into a custom-designed Research Electronic Data Capture database. RESULTS: The search identified 67,199 records of which 230 were included. The annual number of critical care randomised controlled trials published increased gradually over a 30-year period from 0 in 1990 to 19 in 2014 with stabilisation at 8-11 between 2015 and 2020. Twenty-seven percent of randomised controlled trials were low risk in all categories using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Methodological characteristics such as registration on clinical trials registries and data safety monitoring committee presence significantly (p < 0.001) increased over time. The median recruitment was 376 patients (interquartile range 125-895) with significant increase (p = 0.002) from 62 (interquartile range: 33-486) in 1991 to 725 (interquartile range: 537-2600) in 2020. This was accompanied by an increase in recruitment times. Thus overall, recruitment rates did not increase. Early cessation occurred in 23% (54/230) of randomised controlled trials with no temporal trend. CONCLUSION: The number, size and some methodological qualities of critical randomised controlled trials with primary outcome of mortality have increased over time, but rates of recruitment and early cessation have been unchanged.


Asunto(s)
Cuidados Críticos , Cultura , Humanos , Niño , Adulto , Recién Nacido , Bases de Datos Factuales , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto
10.
Blood Purif ; 51(12): 997-1005, 2022.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35443247

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Continuous renal replacement therapy using regional citrate anticoagulation is commonly used as a modality of organ support in the critically ill population. Currently, citrate accumulation or toxicity is assessed using surrogate markers, notably the uncorrected total-to-ionized calcium ration. The accuracy and utility of this method have been questioned. OBJECTIVES/AIMS: The aim of this study was to compare the surrogate markers used for assessing citrate accumulation or toxicity using the measurement of plasma citrate as the gold standard. METHODS: Blood was sampled from 20 patients before, during, and after episodes of filtration with citrate concentration measured using spectrophotometry. Demographic and other clinical and biochemical data were also collected. According to protocol, a 15 mmol/L solution of trisodium citrate was used as the prefilter anticoagulant. Results were analyzed using STATA (v16.0) and presented as mean (SD), median (IQR), or simple proportion. Univariate linear regression using citrate concentration as the dependent variable was performed with all surrogate markers. RESULTS: Twenty patients (17 males) were enrolled in the study with a mean (SD) age of 62.7 (9.9) years. The uncorrected calcium ratio had the best fit to the citrate data with an R2 value of 0.39. The albumin-corrected calcium ratio, pH, anion gap (AG), albumin-corrected AG, standard base excess, and strong ion gap all had R2 values less than 0.05. CONCLUSION(S): In the absence of direct measurement of citrate concentration, uncorrected total-to-ionized calcium ratio is superior to other surrogate markers, though not ideal, in assessing citrate accumulation or toxicity.


Asunto(s)
Ácido Cítrico , Terapia de Reemplazo Renal Continuo , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Albúminas , Anticoagulantes/efectos adversos , Biomarcadores , Calcio , Citratos/efectos adversos , Ácido Cítrico/uso terapéutico , Terapia de Reemplazo Renal , Femenino , Anciano
11.
Am J Respir Crit Care Med ; 204(8): 891-901, 2021 10 15.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34652268

RESUMEN

Background: Precision medicine focuses on the identification of therapeutic strategies that are effective for a group of patients based on similar unifying characteristics. The recent success of precision medicine in non-critical care settings has resulted from the confluence of large clinical and biospecimen repositories, innovative bioinformatics, and novel trial designs. Similar advances for precision medicine in sepsis and in the acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) are possible but will require further investigation and significant investment in infrastructure. Methods: This project was funded by the American Thoracic Society Board of Directors. A multidisciplinary and diverse working group reviewed the available literature, established a conceptual framework, and iteratively developed recommendations for the Precision Medicine Research Agenda for Sepsis and ARDS. Results: The following six priority recommendations were developed by the working group: 1) the creation of large richly phenotyped and harmonized knowledge networks of clinical, imaging, and multianalyte molecular data for sepsis and ARDS; 2) the implementation of novel trial designs, including adaptive designs, and embedding trial procedures in the electronic health record; 3) continued innovation in the data science and engineering methods required to identify heterogeneity of treatment effect; 4) further development of the tools necessary for the real-time application of precision medicine approaches; 5) work to ensure that precision medicine strategies are applicable and available to a broad range of patients varying across differing racial, ethnic, socioeconomic, and demographic groups; and 6) the securement and maintenance of adequate and sustainable funding for precision medicine efforts. Conclusions: Precision medicine approaches that incorporate variability in genomic, biologic, and environmental factors may provide a path forward for better individualizing the delivery of therapies and improving care for patients with sepsis and ARDS.


Asunto(s)
Investigación Biomédica/métodos , Cuidados Críticos/métodos , Estudios Observacionales como Asunto/métodos , Medicina de Precisión/métodos , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto/métodos , Síndrome de Dificultad Respiratoria/terapia , Sepsis/terapia , Humanos
12.
JAMA ; 328(19): 1922-1934, 2022 11 15.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36286098

RESUMEN

Importance: The effectiveness of selective decontamination of the digestive tract (SDD) in critically ill adults receiving mechanical ventilation is uncertain. Objective: To determine whether SDD is associated with reduced risk of death in adults receiving mechanical ventilation in intensive care units (ICUs) compared with standard care. Data Sources: The primary search was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases until September 2022. Study Selection: Randomized clinical trials including adults receiving mechanical ventilation in the ICU comparing SDD vs standard care or placebo. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Data extraction and risk of bias assessments were performed in duplicate. The primary analysis was conducted using a bayesian framework. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was hospital mortality. Subgroups included SDD with an intravenous agent compared with SDD without an intravenous agent. There were 8 secondary outcomes including the incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia, ICU-acquired bacteremia, and the incidence of positive cultures of antimicrobial-resistant organisms. Results: There were 32 randomized clinical trials including 24 389 participants in the analysis. The median age of participants in the included studies was 54 years (IQR, 44-60), and the median proportion of female trial participants was 33% (IQR, 25%-38%). Data from 30 trials including 24 034 participants contributed to the primary outcome. The pooled estimated risk ratio (RR) for mortality for SDD compared with standard care was 0.91 (95% credible interval [CrI], 0.82-0.99; I2 = 33.9%; moderate certainty) with a 99.3% posterior probability that SDD reduced hospital mortality. The beneficial association of SDD was evident in trials with an intravenous agent (RR, 0.84 [95% CrI, 0.74-0.94]), but not in trials without an intravenous agent (RR, 1.01 [95% CrI, 0.91-1.11]) (P value for the interaction between subgroups = .02). SDD was associated with reduced risk of ventilator-associated pneumonia (RR, 0.44 [95% CrI, 0.36-0.54]) and ICU-acquired bacteremia (RR, 0.68 [95% CrI, 0.57-0.81]). Available data regarding the incidence of positive cultures of antimicrobial-resistant organisms were not amenable to pooling and were of very low certainty. Conclusions and Relevance: Among adults in the ICU treated with mechanical ventilation, the use of SDD compared with standard care or placebo was associated with lower hospital mortality. Evidence regarding the effect of SDD on antimicrobial resistance was of very low certainty.


Asunto(s)
Antiinfecciosos , Tracto Gastrointestinal , Respiración Artificial , Humanos , Antiinfecciosos/administración & dosificación , Antiinfecciosos/uso terapéutico , Bacteriemia/mortalidad , Bacteriemia/prevención & control , Teorema de Bayes , Tracto Gastrointestinal/efectos de los fármacos , Tracto Gastrointestinal/microbiología , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , Neumonía Asociada al Ventilador/mortalidad , Neumonía Asociada al Ventilador/prevención & control , Respiración Artificial/efectos adversos , Respiración Artificial/mortalidad , Enfermedad Crítica/mortalidad , Enfermedad Crítica/terapia , Farmacorresistencia Microbiana/efectos de los fármacos , Control de Infecciones/métodos
13.
Aust Crit Care ; 35(3): 241-250, 2022 05.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34325975

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to determine whether adjunctive hydrocortisone reduced healthcare expenditure and was cost-effective compared with placebo in New Zealand patients in the Adjunctive Glucocorticoid Therapy in Patients with Septic Shock (ADRENAL) trial. DESIGN: This is a health economic analysis using data linkage to New Zealand Ministry of Health databases to determine resource use, costs, and cost-effectiveness for a 24-month period. SETTING: The study was conducted in New Zealand. PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTION: Patients with septic shock were randomised to receive a 7-day continuous infusion of 200 mg of hydrocortisone or placebo in the ADRENAL trial. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Healthcare expenditure was associated with all hospital admissions, emergency department presentations, outpatient visits, and pharmacy expenditure. Effectiveness outcomes included mortality at 6 months and 24 months and quality of life at 6 months. Cost-effectiveness outcomes were assessed with reference to quality-adjusted life years gained at 6 months and life years gained at 24 months. RESULTS: Of 3800 patients in the ADRENAL trial, 419 (11.0%) were eligible, and 405 (96.7% of those eligible) were included. The mean total costs per patient over 24 months were $143,627 ± 100,890 and $143,772 ± 97,117 for the hydrocortisone and placebo groups, respectively (p = 0.99). Intensive care unit costs for the index admission were $50,492 and $62,288 per patient for the hydrocortisone and placebo groups, respectively (p = 0.09). The mean number of quality-adjusted life years gained at 6 months and mean number of life years gained at 24 months was not significantly different by treatment group, and the probability of hydrocortisone being cost-effective was 55% at 24 months. CONCLUSIONS: In New Zealand, adjunctive hydrocortisone did not reduce total healthcare expenditure or improve outcomes compared with placebo in patients with septic shock.


Asunto(s)
Choque Séptico , Corticoesteroides/uso terapéutico , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Humanos , Hidrocortisona/uso terapéutico , Nueva Zelanda , Calidad de Vida , Choque Séptico/tratamiento farmacológico
14.
N Engl J Med ; 378(9): 797-808, 2018 Mar 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29347874

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Whether hydrocortisone reduces mortality among patients with septic shock is unclear. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients with septic shock who were undergoing mechanical ventilation to receive hydrocortisone (at a dose of 200 mg per day) or placebo for 7 days or until death or discharge from the intensive care unit (ICU), whichever came first. The primary outcome was death from any cause at 90 days. RESULTS: From March 2013 through April 2017, a total of 3800 patients underwent randomization. Status with respect to the primary outcome was ascertained in 3658 patients (1832 of whom had been assigned to the hydrocortisone group and 1826 to the placebo group). At 90 days, 511 patients (27.9%) in the hydrocortisone group and 526 (28.8%) in the placebo group had died (odds ratio, 0.95; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.82 to 1.10; P=0.50). The effect of the trial regimen was similar in six prespecified subgroups. Patients who had been assigned to receive hydrocortisone had faster resolution of shock than those assigned to the placebo group (median duration, 3 days [interquartile range, 2 to 5] vs. 4 days [interquartile range, 2 to 9]; hazard ratio, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.23 to 1.41; P<0.001). Patients in the hydrocortisone group had a shorter duration of the initial episode of mechanical ventilation than those in the placebo group (median, 6 days [interquartile range, 3 to 18] vs. 7 days [interquartile range, 3 to 24]; hazard ratio, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.05 to 1.22; P<0.001), but taking into account episodes of recurrence of ventilation, there were no significant differences in the number of days alive and free from mechanical ventilation. Fewer patients in the hydrocortisone group than in the placebo group received a blood transfusion (37.0% vs. 41.7%; odds ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.72 to 0.94; P=0.004). There were no significant between-group differences with respect to mortality at 28 days, the rate of recurrence of shock, the number of days alive and out of the ICU, the number of days alive and out of the hospital, the recurrence of mechanical ventilation, the rate of renal-replacement therapy, and the incidence of new-onset bacteremia or fungemia. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with septic shock undergoing mechanical ventilation, a continuous infusion of hydrocortisone did not result in lower 90-day mortality than placebo. (Funded by the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia and others; ADRENAL ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01448109 .).


Asunto(s)
Antiinflamatorios/uso terapéutico , Hidrocortisona/uso terapéutico , Choque Séptico/tratamiento farmacológico , APACHE , Anciano , Antiinflamatorios/efectos adversos , Bacteriemia/etiología , Quimioterapia Adyuvante , Método Doble Ciego , Femenino , Fungemia/etiología , Humanos , Hidrocortisona/efectos adversos , Infusiones Intravenosas , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Recurrencia , Terapia de Reemplazo Renal , Respiración Artificial , Choque Séptico/complicaciones , Choque Séptico/mortalidad , Choque Séptico/terapia , Tasa de Supervivencia , Resultado del Tratamiento
15.
Acta Anaesthesiol Scand ; 65(5): 702-710, 2021 05.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33583027

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can lead to severe hypoxic respiratory failure and death. Corticosteroids decrease mortality in severely or critically ill patients with COVID-19. However, the optimal dose remains unresolved. The ongoing randomised COVID STEROID 2 trial investigates the effects of higher vs lower doses of dexamethasone (12 vs 6 mg intravenously daily for up to 10 days) in 1,000 adult patients with COVID-19 and severe hypoxia. METHODS: This protocol outlines the rationale and statistical methods for a secondary, pre-planned Bayesian analysis of the primary outcome (days alive without life support at day 28) and all secondary outcomes registered up to day 90. We will use hurdle-negative binomial models to estimate the mean number of days alive without life support in each group and present results as mean differences and incidence rate ratios with 95% credibility intervals (CrIs). Additional count outcomes will be analysed similarly and binary outcomes will be analysed using logistic regression models with results presented as probabilities, relative risks and risk differences with 95% CrIs. We will present probabilities of any benefit/harm, clinically important benefit/harm and probabilities of effects smaller than pre-defined clinically minimally important differences for all outcomes analysed. Analyses will be adjusted for stratification variables and conducted using weakly informative priors supplemented by sensitivity analyses using sceptic priors. DISCUSSION: This secondary, pre-planned Bayesian analysis will supplement the primary, conventional analysis and may help clinicians, researchers and policymakers interpret the results of the COVID STEROID 2 trial while avoiding arbitrarily dichotomised interpretations of the results. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04509973; EudraCT: 2020-003363-25.


Asunto(s)
Tratamiento Farmacológico de COVID-19 , Dexametasona/administración & dosificación , Hipoxia/tratamiento farmacológico , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , SARS-CoV-2 , Teorema de Bayes , Humanos
16.
Acta Anaesthesiol Scand ; 65(6): 834-845, 2021 Jul.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33583034

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has resulted in millions of deaths and overburdened healthcare systems worldwide. Systemic low-dose corticosteroids have proven clinical benefit in patients with severe COVID-19. Higher doses of corticosteroids are used in other inflammatory lung diseases and may offer additional clinical benefits in COVID-19. At present, the balance between benefits and harms of higher vs. lower doses of corticosteroids for patients with COVID-19 is unclear. METHODS: The COVID STEROID 2 trial is an investigator-initiated, international, parallel-grouped, blinded, centrally randomised and stratified clinical trial assessing higher (12 mg) vs. lower (6 mg) doses of dexamethasone for adults with COVID-19 and severe hypoxia. We plan to enrol 1,000 patients in Denmark, Sweden, Switzerland and India. The primary outcome is days alive without life support (invasive mechanical ventilation, circulatory support or renal replacement therapy) at day 28. Secondary outcomes include serious adverse reactions at day 28; all-cause mortality at day 28, 90 and 180; days alive without life support at day 90; days alive and out of hospital at day 90; and health-related quality of life at day 180. The primary outcome will be analysed using the Kryger Jensen and Lange test adjusted for stratification variables and reported as adjusted mean differences and median differences. The full statistical analysis plan is outlined in this protocol. DISCUSSION: The COVID STEROID 2 trial will provide evidence on the optimal dosing of systemic corticosteroids for COVID-19 patients with severe hypoxia with important implications for patients, their relatives and society.


Asunto(s)
Antiinflamatorios/administración & dosificación , Tratamiento Farmacológico de COVID-19 , Dexametasona/administración & dosificación , Pandemias , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto/métodos , SARS-CoV-2 , Antiinflamatorios/efectos adversos , COVID-19/complicaciones , Dinamarca , Dexametasona/efectos adversos , Relación Dosis-Respuesta a Droga , Método Doble Ciego , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , Humanos , Hidrocortisona/uso terapéutico , Hipoxia/tratamiento farmacológico , Hipoxia/etiología , India , Cuidados para Prolongación de la Vida/estadística & datos numéricos , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/estadística & datos numéricos , Calidad de Vida , Análisis de Supervivencia , Suecia , Suiza
17.
Acta Anaesthesiol Scand ; 65(10): 1421-1430, 2021 11.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34138478

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: In the early phase of the pandemic, some guidelines recommended the use of corticosteroids for critically ill patients with COVID-19, whereas others recommended against the use despite lack of firm evidence of either benefit or harm. In the COVID STEROID trial, we aimed to assess the effects of low-dose hydrocortisone on patient-centred outcomes in adults with COVID-19 and severe hypoxia. METHODS: In this multicentre, parallel-group, placebo-controlled, blinded, centrally randomised, stratified clinical trial, we randomly assigned adults with confirmed COVID-19 and severe hypoxia (use of mechanical ventilation or supplementary oxygen with a flow of at least 10 L/min) to either hydrocortisone (200 mg/d) vs a matching placebo for 7 days or until hospital discharge. The primary outcome was the number of days alive without life support at day 28 after randomisation. RESULTS: The trial was terminated early when 30 out of 1000 participants had been enrolled because of external evidence indicating benefit from corticosteroids in severe COVID-19. At day 28, the median number of days alive without life support in the hydrocortisone vs placebo group were 7 vs 10 (adjusted mean difference: -1.1 days, 95% CI -9.5 to 7.3, P = .79); mortality was 6/16 vs 2/14; and the number of serious adverse reactions 1/16 vs 0/14. CONCLUSIONS: In this trial of adults with COVID-19 and severe hypoxia, we were unable to provide precise estimates of the benefits and harms of hydrocortisone as compared with placebo as only 3% of the planned sample size were enrolled. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04348305. European Union Drug Regulation Authorities Clinical Trials (EudraCT) Database: 2020-001395-15.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Hidrocortisona , Adulto , Humanos , Hipoxia , SARS-CoV-2 , Resultado del Tratamiento
18.
Am J Respir Crit Care Med ; 202(5): 700-707, 2020 09 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32396775

RESUMEN

Rationale: Whether biomarkers can identify subgroups of patients with septic shock with differential treatment responses to hydrocortisone is unknown.Objectives: To determine if there is heterogeneity in effect for hydrocortisone on mortality, shock resolution, and other clinical outcomes based on baseline cortisol, aldosterone, and ascorbic acid concentrations.Methods: From May 2014 to April 2017, we obtained serum samples from 529 patients with septic shock from 22 ICUs in Australia and New Zealand.Measurements and Main Results: There were no significant interactions between the association with 90-day mortality and treatment with either hydrocortisone or placebo for total cortisol (odds ratio [OR], 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02-1.16 vs. OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.00-1.13; P = 0.70), free cortisol (OR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.04-1.38 vs. OR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.02-1.32; P = 0.75), aldosterone (OR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.97-1.05 vs. OR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.98-1.04; P = 0.99), or ascorbic acid (OR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.89-1.39 vs. OR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.91-1.22; P = 0.70), respectively. Similar results were observed for the association with shock resolution. Elevated free cortisol was significantly associated with 90-day mortality (OR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.00-1.27; P = 0.04), but total cortisol, aldosterone, and ascorbic acid were not.Conclusions: In patients with septic shock, there was no heterogeneity in effect of adjunctive hydrocortisone on mortality, shock resolution, or other clinical outcomes based on cortisol, aldosterone, and ascorbic acid concentrations. Plasma aldosterone and ascorbic acid concentrations are not associated with outcome.


Asunto(s)
Aldosterona/sangre , Ácido Ascórbico/sangre , Hidrocortisona/farmacocinética , Choque Séptico/tratamiento farmacológico , Anciano , Antiinflamatorios/farmacocinética , Australia/epidemiología , Biomarcadores/sangre , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Nueva Zelanda/epidemiología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Índice de Severidad de la Enfermedad , Choque Séptico/sangre , Choque Séptico/mortalidad , Tasa de Supervivencia/tendencias , Resultado del Tratamiento
19.
N Engl J Med ; 377(5): 419-430, 2017 08 03.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28528561

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Vasodilatory shock that does not respond to high-dose vasopressors is associated with high mortality. We investigated the effectiveness of angiotensin II for the treatment of patients with this condition. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients with vasodilatory shock who were receiving more than 0.2 µg of norepinephrine per kilogram of body weight per minute or the equivalent dose of another vasopressor to receive infusions of either angiotensin II or placebo. The primary end point was a response with respect to mean arterial pressure at hour 3 after the start of infusion, with response defined as an increase from baseline of at least 10 mm Hg or an increase to at least 75 mm Hg, without an increase in the dose of background vasopressors. RESULTS: A total of 344 patients were assigned to one of the two regimens; 321 received a study intervention (163 received angiotensin II, and 158 received placebo) and were included in the analysis. The primary end point was reached by more patients in the angiotensin II group (114 of 163 patients, 69.9%) than in the placebo group (37 of 158 patients, 23.4%) (odds ratio, 7.95; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.76 to 13.3; P<0.001). At 48 hours, the mean improvement in the cardiovascular Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score (scores range from 0 to 4, with higher scores indicating more severe dysfunction) was greater in the angiotensin II group than in the placebo group (-1.75 vs. -1.28, P=0.01). Serious adverse events were reported in 60.7% of the patients in the angiotensin II group and in 67.1% in the placebo group. Death by day 28 occurred in 75 of 163 patients (46%) in the angiotensin II group and in 85 of 158 patients (54%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.57 to 1.07; P=0.12). CONCLUSIONS: Angiotensin II effectively increased blood pressure in patients with vasodilatory shock that did not respond to high doses of conventional vasopressors. (Funded by La Jolla Pharmaceutical Company; ATHOS-3 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02338843 .).


Asunto(s)
Angiotensina II/uso terapéutico , Presión Sanguínea/efectos de los fármacos , Choque/tratamiento farmacológico , Vasoconstrictores/uso terapéutico , Anciano , Angiotensina II/efectos adversos , Catecolaminas/administración & dosificación , Método Doble Ciego , Quimioterapia Combinada , Femenino , Humanos , Hipotensión/tratamiento farmacológico , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Puntuaciones en la Disfunción de Órganos , Choque/fisiopatología , Vasoconstrictores/efectos adversos
20.
Acta Anaesthesiol Scand ; 64(9): 1365-1375, 2020 10.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32779728

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 has caused a pandemic of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) with many patients developing hypoxic respiratory failure. Corticosteroids reduce the time on mechanical ventilation, length of stay in the intensive care unit and potentially also mortality in similar patient populations. However, corticosteroids have undesirable effects, including longer time to viral clearance. Clinical equipoise on the use of corticosteroids for COVID-19 exists. METHODS: The COVID STEROID trial is an international, randomised, stratified, blinded clinical trial. We will allocate 1000 adult patients with COVID-19 receiving ≥10 L/min of oxygen or on mechanical ventilation to intravenous hydrocortisone 200 mg daily vs placebo (0.9% saline) for 7 days. The primary outcome is days alive without life support (ie mechanical ventilation, circulatory support, and renal replacement therapy) at day 28. Secondary outcomes are serious adverse reactions at day 14; days alive without life support at day 90; days alive and out of hospital at day 90; all-cause mortality at day 28, day 90, and 1 year; and health-related quality of life at 1 year. We will conduct the statistical analyses according to this protocol, including interim analyses for every 250 patients followed for 28 days. The primary outcome will be compared using the Kryger Jensen and Lange test in the intention to treat population and reported as differences in means and medians with 95% confidence intervals. DISCUSSION: The COVID STEROID trial will provide important evidence to guide the use of corticosteroids in COVID-19 and severe hypoxia.


Asunto(s)
Tratamiento Farmacológico de COVID-19 , COVID-19/complicaciones , Hidrocortisona/uso terapéutico , Hipoxia/complicaciones , Hipoxia/tratamiento farmacológico , Proyectos de Investigación , Adulto , Antiinflamatorios/uso terapéutico , Humanos , Resultado del Tratamiento
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA