A Randomized Trial of Intravenous Amino Acids for Kidney Protection.

BACKGROUND: Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a serious and common complication of cardiac surgery, for which reduced kidney perfusion is a key contributing factor. Intravenous amino acids increase kidney perfusion and recruit renal functional reserve. However, the efficacy of amino acids in reducing the occurrence of AKI after cardiac surgery is uncertain. METHODS: In a multinational, double-blind trial, we randomly assigned adult patients who were scheduled to undergo cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass to receive an intravenous infusion of either a balanced mixture of amino acids, at a dose of 2 g per kilogram of ideal body weight per day, or placebo (Ringer's solution) for up to 3 days. The primary outcome was the occurrence of AKI, defined according to the Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes creatinine criteria. Secondary outcomes included the severity of AKI, the use and duration of kidney-replacement therapy, and all-cause 30-day mortality. RESULTS: We recruited 3511 patients at 22 centers in three countries and assigned 1759 patients to the amino acid group and 1752 to the placebo group. AKI occurred in 474 patients (26.9%) in the amino acid group and in 555 (31.7%) in the placebo group (relative risk, 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.77 to 0.94; P = 0.002). Stage 3 AKI occurred in 29 patients (1.6%) and 52 patients (3.0%), respectively (relative risk, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.35 to 0.87). Kidney-replacement therapy was used in 24 patients (1.4%) in the amino acid group and in 33 patients (1.9%) in the placebo group. There were no substantial differences between the two groups in other secondary outcomes or in adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Among adult patients undergoing cardiac surgery, infusion of amino acids reduced the occurrence of AKI. (Funded by the Italian Ministry of Health; PROTECTION ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03709264.).

Impact and Feasibility of Mechanical Ventilation at a Surgical Center in Sierra Leone: Experience From EMERGENCY's Hospital in Goderich.

OBJECTIVES: Despite the large burden of critically ill patients in developing countries, mechanical ventilation (MV) is scarce in these low-resource settings. In the absence of data, issues like costs and lack of training are often felt to outweigh the benefits of potential MV implementation in such places. We aimed to investigate the impact and feasibility of MV in a surgical ICU in West Africa. DESIGN: This is a 7-month retrospective observational study (from October 25, 2022, to May 25, 2023), covering all patients consecutively admitted to ICU. SETTING: The NGO EMERGENCY's hospital in Goderich, Freetown, Sierra Leone. The hospital is a referral center for acute care surgery. PATIENTS: Critical patients admitted to the hospital's ICU. INTERVENTIONS: Following brief, practical training of the nursing staff, one basic mechanical ventilator was installed at the hospital's ICU, under the supervision of two intensivists. Only patients with a body weight of over 15 kg and who met the "extreme criteria" for MV received this life-saving therapy. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Of the 195 files of patients admitted to ICU during the study period, 162 were analyzed. The median age was 16 (interquartile range 7-27) and 48.1% of the population were under 14 years. The most common cause of admission was trauma (58.6%), followed by acute abdomen (33.3%), caustic soda ingestion (6.2%), and burns (1.9%). Of the overall population, 26 patients (16%) underwent MV (88.5% trauma cases vs. 11.5% acute abdomen). Median time on MV was 24 hours (12-64). The mortality rate in the MV group was 30.8% (8/26), while in the overall study population, it was 11.7% (19/162). One potentially life-threatening event of tube obstruction was handled appropriately. CONCLUSIONS: This study strongly supports the implementation of MV in low-resource settings. In our experience, the consistent benefit of reduced mortality among critical patients largely outweighs the associated challenges.

Positive single-center randomized trials and subsequent multicenter randomized trials in critically ill patients: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: It is unclear how often survival benefits observed in single-center randomized controlled trials (sRCTs) involving critically ill patients are confirmed by subsequent multicenter randomized controlled trials (mRCTs). We aimed to perform a systemic literature review of sRCTs with a statistically significant mortality reduction and to evaluate whether subsequent mRCTs confirmed such reduction. METHODS: We searched PubMed for sRCTs published in the New England Journal of Medicine, JAMA, or Lancet, from inception until December 31, 2016. We selected studies reporting a statistically significant mortality decrease using any intervention (drug, technique, or strategy) in adult critically ill patients. We then searched for subsequent mRCTs addressing the same research question tested by the sRCT. We compared the concordance of results between sRCTs and mRCTs when any mRCT was available. We registered this systematic review in the PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42023455362). RESULTS: We identified 19 sRCTs reporting a significant mortality reduction in adult critically ill patients. For 16 sRCTs, we identified at least one subsequent mRCT (24 trials in total), while the interventions from three sRCTs have not yet been addressed in a subsequent mRCT. Only one out of 16 sRCTs (6%) was followed by a mRCT replicating a significant mortality reduction; 14 (88%) were followed by mRCTs with no mortality difference. The positive finding of one sRCT (6%) on intensive glycemic control was contradicted by a subsequent mRCT showing a significant mortality increase. Of the 14 sRCTs referenced at least once in international guidelines, six (43%) have since been either removed or suggested against in the most recent versions of relevant guidelines. CONCLUSION: Mortality reduction shown by sRCTs is typically not replicated by mRCTs. The findings of sRCTs should be considered hypothesis-generating and should not contribute to guidelines.

Continuous vs Intermittent Meropenem Administration in Critically Ill Patients With Sepsis: The MERCY Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Meropenem is a widely prescribed ß-lactam antibiotic. Meropenem exhibits maximum pharmacodynamic efficacy when given by continuous infusion to deliver constant drug levels above the minimal inhibitory concentration. Compared with intermittent administration, continuous administration of meropenem may improve clinical outcomes. Objective: To determine whether continuous administration of meropenem reduces a composite of mortality and emergence of pandrug-resistant or extensively drug-resistant bacteria compared with intermittent administration in critically ill patients with sepsis. Design, Setting, and Participants: A double-blind, randomized clinical trial enrolling critically ill patients with sepsis or septic shock who had been prescribed meropenem by their treating clinicians at 31 intensive care units of 26 hospitals in 4 countries (Croatia, Italy, Kazakhstan, and Russia). Patients were enrolled between June 5, 2018, and August 9, 2022, and the final 90-day follow-up was completed in November 2022. Interventions: Patients were randomized to receive an equal dose of the antibiotic meropenem by either continuous administration (n = 303) or intermittent administration (n = 304). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality and emergence of pandrug-resistant or extensively drug-resistant bacteria at day 28. There were 4 secondary outcomes, including days alive and free from antibiotics at day 28, days alive and free from the intensive care unit at day 28, and all-cause mortality at day 90. Seizures, allergic reactions, and mortality were recorded as adverse events. Results: All 607 patients (mean age, 64 [SD, 15] years; 203 were women [33%]) were included in the measurement of the 28-day primary outcome and completed the 90-day mortality follow-up. The majority (369 patients, 61%) had septic shock. The median time from hospital admission to randomization was 9 days (IQR, 3-17 days) and the median duration of meropenem therapy was 11 days (IQR, 6-17 days). Only 1 crossover event was recorded. The primary outcome occurred in 142 patients (47%) in the continuous administration group and in 149 patients (49%) in the intermittent administration group (relative risk, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.81-1.13], P = .60). Of the 4 secondary outcomes, none was statistically significant. No adverse events of seizures or allergic reactions related to the study drug were reported. At 90 days, mortality was 42% both in the continuous administration group (127 of 303 patients) and in the intermittent administration group (127 of 304 patients). Conclusions and Relevance: In critically ill patients with sepsis, compared with intermittent administration, the continuous administration of meropenem did not improve the composite outcome of mortality and emergence of pandrug-resistant or extensively drug-resistant bacteria at day 28. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03452839.

Residual lung damage following ARDS in COVID-19 ICU survivors.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 acute respiratory distress syndrome (COVID-19 ARDS) is a disease that often requires invasive ventilation. Little is known about COVID-19 ARDS sequelae. We assessed the mid-term lung status of COVID-19 survivors and investigated factors associated with pulmonary sequelae. METHODS: All adult COVID-19 patients admitted to the intensive care unit from 25th February to 27th April 2020 were included. Lung function was evaluated through chest CT scan and pulmonary function tests (PFT). Logistic regression was used to identify predictors of persisting lung alterations. RESULTS: Forty-nine patients (75%) completed lung assessment. Chest CT scan was performed after a median (interquartile range) time of 97 (89-105) days, whilst PFT after 142 (133-160) days. The median age was 58 (52-65) years and most patients were male (90%). The median duration of mechanical ventilation was 11 (6-16) days. Median tidal volume/ideal body weight (TV/IBW) was 6.8 (5.71-7.67) ml/Kg. 59% and 63% of patients showed radiological and functional lung sequelae, respectively. The diffusion capacity of carbon monoxide (DLCO ) was reduced by 59%, with a median per cent of predicted DLCO of 72.1 (57.9-93.9) %. Mean TV/IBW during invasive ventilation emerged as an independent predictor of persistent CT scan abnormalities, whilst the duration of mechanical ventilation was an independent predictor of both CT and PFT abnormalities. The extension of lung involvement at hospital admission (evaluated through Radiographic Assessment of Lung Edema, RALE score) independently predicted the risk of persistent alterations in PFTs. CONCLUSIONS: Both the extent of lung parenchymal involvement and mechanical ventilation protocols predict morphological and functional lung abnormalities months after COVID-19.

One-Year Multidisciplinary Follow-Up of Patients With COVID-19 Requiring Invasive Mechanical Ventilation.

OBJECTIVES: Patients with COVID-19 frequently develop acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) requiring intensive care unit (ICU) admission. Data on long-term survival of these patients are lacking. The authors investigated 1-year survival, quality of life, and functional recovery of patients with COVID-19 ARDS requiring invasive mechanical ventilation. DESIGN: Prospective observational study. SETTING: Tertiary-care university hospital. PARTICIPANTS: All patients with COVID-19 ARDS receiving invasive mechanical ventilation and discharged alive from hospital. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were contacted by phone after 1 year. Functional, cognitive, and psychological outcomes were explored through a questionnaire and assessed using validated scales. Patients were offered the possibility to undergo a follow-up chest computed tomography (CT) scan. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The study included all adult (age ≥18 years) patients with COVID-19-related ARDS admitted to an ICU of the authors' institution between February 25, 2020, and April 27, 2020, who received at least 1 day of invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). Of 116 patients who received IMV, 61 (52.6%) survived to hospital discharge. These survivors were assessed 1 year after discharge and 56 completed a battery of tests of cognition, activities of daily living, and interaction with family members. They had overall good functional recovery, with >80% reporting good recovery and no difficulties in usual activities. A total of 52 (93%) of patients had no dyspnea at rest. Severe anxiety/depression was reported by 5 (8.9%) patients. Comparing 2-month and 1-year data, the authors observed the most significant improvements in the areas of working status and exertional dyspnea. One-year chest CT scans were available for 36 patients; fibrotic-like changes were present in 4 patients. CONCLUSIONS: All patients who survived the acute phase of COVID-19 and were discharged from the hospital were alive at the 1-year follow up, and the vast majority of them had good overall recovery and quality of life.

Prevalence, Characteristics, Risk Factors, and Outcomes of Invasively Ventilated COVID-19 Patients with Acute Kidney Injury and Renal Replacement Therapy.

BACKGROUND: There is no information on acute kidney injury (AKI) and continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) among invasively ventilated coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients in Western healthcare systems. OBJECTIVE: To study the prevalence, characteristics, risk factors and outcome of AKI and CRRT among invasively ventilated COVID-19 patients. METHODS: Observational study in a tertiary care hospital in Milan, Italy. RESULTS: Among 99 patients, 72 (75.0%) developed AKI and 17 (17.7%) received CRRT. Most of the patients developed stage 1 AKI (33 [45.8%]), while 15 (20.8%) developed stage 2 AKI and 24 (33.4%) a stage 3 AKI. Patients who developed AKI or needed CRRT at latest follow-up were older, and among CRRT treated patients a greater proportion had preexisting CKD. Hospital mortality was 38.9% for AKI and 52.9% for CRRT patients. CONCLUSIONS: Among invasively ventilated COVID-19 patients, AKI is very common and CRRT use is common. Both carry a high risk of in-hospital mortality.

Tracheal intubation in patients at risk for cervical spinal cord injury: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Tracheal intubation in patients at risk for secondary spinal cord injury is potentially difficult and risky. OBJECTIVES: To compare tracheal intubation techniques in adult patients at risk for secondary cervical spinal cord injury undergoing surgery. Primary outcome was first-attempt failure rate. Secondary outcomes were time to successful intubation and procedure complications. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with trial sequential analysis (TSA). DATA SOURCES: Databases searched up to July 2019. ELIGIBILITY: Randomized controlled trials comparing different intubation techniques. RESULTS: We included 18 trials enrolling 1972 patients. Four studies used the "awake" approach, but no study compared awake versus non-awake techniques. In remaining 14 RCTs, intubation was performed under general anesthesia. First-attempt failure rate was similar when comparing direct laryngoscopy or fiberoptic bronchoscopy versus other techniques. A better first-attempt failure rate was found with videolaryngoscopy and when pooling all the fiberoptic techniques together. All these results appeared not significant at TSA, suggesting inconclusive evidence. Intubating lighted stylet allowed faster intubation. Postoperative neurological complications were 0.34% (no significant difference among techniques). No life-threatening adverse event was reported; mild local complications were common (19.5%). The certainty of evidence was low to very low mainly due to high imprecision and indirectness. CONCLUSIONS: Videolaryngoscopy and fiberoptic-assisted techniques might be associated with higher first-attempt failure rate over controls. However, low to very low certainty of evidence does not allow firm conclusions on the best tracheal intubation in patients at risk for cervical spinal cord injury.

Correction to: Tracheal intubation in critically ill patients: a comprehensive systematic review of randomized trials.

In the publication of this article [1], there was an error in a contributors Family Name. This has now been updated in the original article.

A Systematic Review and International Web-Based Survey of Randomized Controlled Trials in the Perioperative and Critical Care Setting: Interventions Increasing Mortality.

OBJECTIVE: Reducing mortality is a key target in critical care and perioperative medicine. The authors aimed to identify all nonsurgical interventions (drugs, techniques, strategies) shown by randomized trials to increase mortality in these clinical settings. DESIGN: A systematic review of the literature followed by a consensus-based voting process. SETTING: A web-based international consensus conference. PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred fifty-one physicians from 46 countries. INTERVENTIONS: The authors performed a systematic literature search and identified all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) showing a significant increase in unadjusted landmark mortality among surgical or critically ill patients. The authors reviewed such studies during a meeting by a core group of experts. Studies selected after such review advanced to web-based voting by clinicians in relation to agreement, clinical practice, and willingness to include each intervention in international guidelines. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The authors selected 12 RCTs dealing with 12 interventions increasing mortality: diaspirin-crosslinked hemoglobin (92% of agreement among web voters), overfeeding, nitric oxide synthase inhibitor in septic shock, human growth hormone, thyroxin in acute kidney injury, intravenous salbutamol in acute respiratory distress syndrome, plasma-derived protein C concentrate, aprotinin in high-risk cardiac surgery, cysteine prodrug, hypothermia in meningitis, methylprednisolone in traumatic brain injury, and albumin in traumatic brain injury (72% of agreement). Overall, a high consistency (ranging from 80% to 90%) between agreement and clinical practice was observed. CONCLUSION: The authors identified 12 clinical interventions showing increased mortality supported by randomized controlled trials with nonconflicting evidence, and wide agreement upon clinicians on a global scale.

A Systematic Review and International Web-Based Survey of Randomized Controlled Trials in the Perioperative and Critical Care Setting: Interventions Reducing Mortality.

The authors aimed to identify interventions documented by randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that reduce mortality in adult critically ill and perioperative patients, followed by a survey of clinicians' opinions and routine practices to understand the clinicians' response to such evidence. The authors performed a comprehensive literature review to identify all topics reported to reduce mortality in perioperative and critical care settings according to at least 2 RCTs or to a multicenter RCT or to a single-center RCT plus guidelines. The authors generated position statements that were voted on online by physicians worldwide for agreement, use, and willingness to include in international guidelines. From 262 RCT manuscripts reporting mortality differences in the perioperative and critically ill settings, the authors selected 27 drugs, techniques, and strategies (66 RCTs, most frequently published by the New England Journal of Medicine [13 papers], Lancet [7], and Journal of the American Medical Association [5]) with an agreement ≥67% from over 250 physicians (46 countries). Noninvasive ventilation was the intervention supported by the largest number of RCTs (n = 13). The concordance between agreement and use (a positive answer both to "do you agree" and "do you use") showed differences between Western and other countries and between anesthesiologists and intensive care unit physicians. The authors identified 27 clinical interventions with randomized evidence of survival benefit and strong clinician support in support of their potential life-saving properties in perioperative and critically ill patients with noninvasive ventilation having the highest level of support. However, clinician views appear affected by specialty and geographical location.

Tracheal intubation in critically ill patients: a comprehensive systematic review of randomized trials.

BACKGROUND: We performed a systematic review of randomized controlled studies evaluating any drug, technique or device aimed at improving the success rate or safety of tracheal intubation in the critically ill. METHODS: We searched PubMed, BioMed Central, Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of Clinical Trials and references of retrieved articles. Finally, pertinent reviews were also scanned to detect further studies until May 2017. The following inclusion criteria were considered: tracheal intubation in adult critically ill patients; randomized controlled trial; study performed in Intensive Care Unit, Emergency Department or ordinary ward; and work published in the last 20 years. Exclusion criteria were pre-hospital or operating theatre settings and simulation-based studies. Two investigators selected studies for the final analysis. Extracted data included first author, publication year, characteristics of patients and clinical settings, intervention details, comparators and relevant outcomes. The risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane Collaboration's Risk of Bias tool. RESULTS: We identified 22 trials on use of a pre-procedure check-list (1 study), pre-oxygenation or apneic oxygenation (6 studies), sedatives (3 studies), neuromuscular blocking agents (1 study), patient positioning (1 study), video laryngoscopy (9 studies), and post-intubation lung recruitment (1 study). Pre-oxygenation with non-invasive ventilation (NIV) and/or high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) showed a possible beneficial role. Post-intubation recruitment improved oxygenation, while ramped position increased the number of intubation attempts and thiopental had negative hemodynamic effects. No effect was found for use of a checklist, apneic oxygenation (on oxygenation and hemodynamics), videolaryngoscopy (on number and length of intubation attempts), sedatives and neuromuscular blockers (on hemodynamics). Finally, videolaryngoscopy was associated with severe adverse effects in multiple trials. CONCLUSIONS: The limited available evidence supports a beneficial role of pre-oxygenation with NIV and HFNC before intubation of critically ill patients. Recruitment maneuvers may increase post-intubation oxygenation. Ramped position increased the number of intubation attempts; thiopental had negative hemodynamic effects and videolaryngoscopy might favor adverse events.

Steroids and Survival in Critically Ill Adult Patients: A Meta-analysis of 135 Randomized Trials.

OBJECTIVE: Corticosteroids have important effects on intermediate outcomes in critically ill patients, but their effect on survival is unknown. The objective of this meta-analysis was to analyze the effect on mortality of corticosteroids in critical and perioperative settings. DESIGN: A meta-analysis of randomized trials. SETTING: PubMed, Embase, BioMed Central, Google Scholar, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched to February 1, 2018, for randomized trials comparing corticosteroids with placebo or standard care. PARTICIPANTS: Critically ill or surgical adult patients. INTERVENTIONS: Corticosteroids compared with placebo or standard care. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 44,553 patients from 135 studies were included. Overall, mortality in the corticosteroid group and in the control group were similar (16% v 16%; p = 0.9). Subanalyses identified a beneficial effect of corticosteroids on survival in patients with respiratory system diseases (9% v 13%; p < 0.001) and bacterial meningitis (28% v 32%; p= 0.04), and a detrimental effect on survival in patients with traumatic brain injury (22% v 19%; p < 0.001). No differences in mortality were found in patients with cardiac diseases (7% v 6%; p = 0.7), in patients undergoing cardiac surgery (2.8% v 3.2% p = 0.14), and when treatment duration or patient age were considered. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis documents the safety of corticosteroids in the overall critically ill population with the notable exception of brain injury patients, a setting where the authors confirmed their detrimental effect on survival. A possible beneficial effect of corticosteroids on survival was found among patients with respiratory diseases and in patients with bacterial meningitis.

Nonsurgical Strategies to Reduce Mortality in Patients Undergoing Cardiac Surgery: An Updated Consensus Process.

OBJECTIVE: A careful choice of perioperative care strategies is pivotal to improve survival in cardiac surgery. However, there is no general agreement or particular attention to which nonsurgical interventions can reduce mortality in this setting. The authors sought to address this issue with a consensus-based approach. DESIGN: A systematic review of the literature followed by a consensus-based voting process. SETTING: A web-based international consensus conference. PARTICIPANTS: More than 400 physicians from 52 countries participated in this web-based consensus conference. INTERVENTIONS: The authors identified all studies published in peer-reviewed journals that reported on interventions with a statistically significant effect on mortality in the setting of cardiac surgery through a systematic Medline/PubMed search and contacts with experts. These studies were discussed during a consensus meeting and those considered eligible for inclusion in this study were voted on by clinicians worldwide. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Eleven interventions finally were selected: 10 were shown to reduce mortality (aspirin, glycemic control, high-volume surgeons, prophylactic intra-aortic balloon pump, levosimendan, leuko-depleted red blood cells transfusion, noninvasive ventilation, tranexamic acid, vacuum-assisted closure, and volatile agents), whereas 1 (aprotinin) increased mortality. A significant difference in the percentages of agreement among different countries and a variable gap between agreement and clinical practice were found for most of the interventions. CONCLUSIONS: This updated consensus process identified 11 nonsurgical interventions with possible survival implications for patients undergoing cardiac surgery. This list of interventions may help cardiac anesthesiologists and intensivists worldwide in their daily clinical practice and can contribute to direct future research in the field.

Randomized Evidence for Reduction of Perioperative Mortality: An Updated Consensus Process.

OBJECTIVE: Of the 230 million patients undergoing major surgical procedures every year, more than 1 million will die within 30 days. Thus, any nonsurgical interventions that help reduce perioperative mortality might save thousands of lives. The authors have updated a previous consensus process to identify all the nonsurgical interventions, supported by randomized evidence, that may help reduce perioperative mortality. DESIGN AND SETTING: A web-based international consensus conference. PARTICIPANTS: The study comprised 500 clinicians from 61 countries. INTERVENTIONS: A systematic literature search was performed to identify published literature about nonsurgical interventions, supported by randomized evidence, showing a statistically significant impact on mortality. A consensus conference of experts discussed eligible papers. The interventions identified by the conference then were submitted to colleagues worldwide through a web-based survey. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The authors identified 11 interventions contributing to increased survival (perioperative hemodynamic optimization, neuraxial anesthesia, noninvasive ventilation, tranexamic acid, selective decontamination of the gastrointestinal tract, insulin for tight glycemic control, preoperative intra-aortic balloon pump, leuko-depleted red blood cells transfusion, levosimendan, volatile agents, and remote ischemic preconditioning) and 2 interventions showing increased mortality (beta-blocker therapy and aprotinin). Interventions then were voted on by participating clinicians. Percentages of agreement among clinicians in different countries differed significantly for 6 interventions, and a variable gap between evidence and clinical practice was noted. CONCLUSIONS: The authors identified 13 nonsurgical interventions that may decrease or increase perioperative mortality, with variable agreement by clinicians. Such interventions may be optimal candidates for investigation in high-quality trials and discussion in international guidelines to reduce perioperative mortality.

Volatile Agents in Medical and Surgical Intensive Care Units: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.

OBJECTIVE: To comprehensively assess published randomized peer-reviewed studies related to volatile agents used for sedation in intensive care unit (ICU) settings, with the hypothesis that volatile agents could reduce time to extubation in adult patients. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials. SETTING: Intensive care units. PARTICIPANTS: Critically ill patients. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The BioMedCentral, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register databases of clinical trials were searched systematically for studies on volatile agents used in the ICU setting. Articles were assessed by trained investigators, and divergences were resolved by consensus. Inclusion criteria included random allocation to treatment (volatile agents versus any intravenous comparator, with no restriction on dose or time of administration) in patients requiring mechanical ventilation in the ICU. Twelve studies with 934 patients were included in the meta-analysis. The use of halogenated agents reduced the time to extubation (standardized mean difference = -0.78 [-1.01 to -0.55] hours; p for effect<0.00001; p for heterogeneity = 0.18; I(2) = 32% in 7 studies with 503 patients). Results for time to extubation were confirmed in all subanalyses (eg, medical and surgical patients) and sensitivity analyses. No differences in length of hospital stay, ICU stay, and mortality were recorded. CONCLUSIONS: In this meta-analysis of randomized trials, volatile anesthetics reduced time to extubation in medical and surgical ICU patients. The results of this study should be confirmed by large and high-quality randomized controlled studies.

Worldwide Opinion on Multicenter Randomized Interventions Showing Mortality Reduction in Critically Ill Patients: A Democracy-Based Medicine Approach.

OBJECTIVES: Democracy-based medicine is a combination of evidence-based medicine (systematic review), expert assessment, and worldwide voting by physicians to express their opinions and self-reported practice via the Internet. The authors applied democracy-based medicine to key trials in critical care medicine. DESIGN AND SETTING: A systematic review of literature followed by web-based voting on findings of a consensus conference. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 555 clinicians from 61 countries. INTERVENTIONS: The authors performed a systematic literature review (via searching MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, and Embase) and selected all multicenter randomized clinical trials in critical care that reported a significant effect on survival and were endorsed by expert clinicians. Then they solicited voting and self-reported practice on such evidence via an interactive Internet questionnaire. Relationships among trial sample size, design, and respondents' agreement were investigated. The gap between agreement and use/avoidance and the influence of country origin on physicians' approach to interventions also were investigated. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: According to 24 multicenter randomized controlled trials, 15 interventions affecting mortality were identified. Wide variabilities in both the level of agreement and reported practice among different interventions and countries were found. Moreover, agreement and reported practice often did not coincide. Finally, a positive correlation among agreement, trial sample size, and number of included centers was found. On the contrary, trial design did not influence clinicians' agreement. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians' clinical practice and agreement with the literature vary among different interventions and countries. The role of these interventions in affecting survival should be further investigated to reduce both the gap between evidence and clinical practice and transnational differences.