Direct assessment of microcirculation in shock: a randomized-controlled multicenter study.

PURPOSE: Shock is a life-threatening condition characterized by substantial alterations in the microcirculation. This study tests the hypothesis that considering sublingual microcirculatory perfusion variables in the therapeutic management reduces 30-day mortality in patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) with shock. METHODS: This randomized, prospective clinical multicenter trial-recruited patients with an arterial lactate value above two mmol/L, requiring vasopressors despite adequate fluid resuscitation, regardless of the cause of shock. All patients received sequential sublingual measurements using a sidestream-dark field (SDF) video microscope at admission to the intensive care unit (± 4 h) and 24 (± 4) hours later that was performed blindly to the treatment team. Patients were randomized to usual routine or to integrating sublingual microcirculatory perfusion variables in the therapy plan. The primary endpoint was 30-day mortality, secondary endpoints were length of stay on the ICU and the hospital, and 6-months mortality. RESULTS: Overall, we included 141 patients with cardiogenic (n = 77), post cardiac surgery (n = 27), or septic shock (n = 22). 69 patients were randomized to the intervention and 72 to routine care. No serious adverse events (SAEs) occurred. In the interventional group, significantly more patients received an adjustment (increase or decrease) in vasoactive drugs or fluids (66.7% vs. 41.8%, p = 0.009) within the next hour. Microcirculatory values 24 h after admission and 30-day mortality did not differ [crude: 32 (47.1%) patients versus 25 (34.7%), relative risk (RR) 1.39 (0.91-1.97); Cox-regression: hazard ratio (HR) 1.54 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.90-2.66, p = 0.118)]. CONCLUSION: Integrating sublingual microcirculatory perfusion variables in the therapy plan resulted in treatment changes that do not improve survival at all.

Perspectives on peripheral perfusion assessment.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The ANDROMEDA-SHOCK trial positioned capillary refill time (CRT) assessment as a novel resuscitation target for septic shock.The purpose of this article is to summarize pathophysiological determinants of CRT, review new technical developments on peripheral perfusion assessment, and explore recent evidence on the role of CRT monitoring in septic shock and other critical conditions. RECENT FINDINGS: A growing body of evidence supports the role of peripheral perfusion assessment as a warning and prognostic signal in a variety of clinical conditions among severely ill patients. Recent physiological studies demonstrated a rapid improvement of CRT after a single fluid bolus or a passive leg raising maneuver, a fact which may have diagnostic and therapeutic implications. Moreover, a couple of posthoc analyses of ANDROMEDA-SHOCK trial, reinforce that a normal CRT at the start of septic shock resuscitation, or its rapid normalization, thereafter may be associated with significant better outcomes. SUMMARY: Recent data confirm the relevance of peripheral perfusion assessment in septic shock and other conditions in critically ill patients. Future studies should confirm these findings, and test the potential contribution of technological devices to assess peripheral perfusion.

Systematic assessment of fluid responsiveness during early septic shock resuscitation: secondary analysis of the ANDROMEDA-SHOCK trial.

BACKGROUND: Fluid boluses are administered to septic shock patients with the purpose of increasing cardiac output as a means to restore tissue perfusion. Unfortunately, fluid therapy has a narrow therapeutic index, and therefore, several approaches to increase safety have been proposed. Fluid responsiveness (FR) assessment might predict which patients will effectively increase cardiac output after a fluid bolus (FR+), thus preventing potentially harmful fluid administration in non-fluid responsive (FR-) patients. However, there are scarce data on the impact of assessing FR on major outcomes. The recent ANDROMEDA-SHOCK trial included systematic per-protocol assessment of FR. We performed a post hoc analysis of the study dataset with the aim of exploring the relationship between FR status at baseline, attainment of specific targets, and clinically relevant outcomes. METHODS: ANDROMEDA-SHOCK compared the effect of peripheral perfusion- vs. lactate-targeted resuscitation on 28-day mortality. FR was assessed before each fluid bolus and periodically thereafter. FR+ and FR- subgroups, independent of the original randomization, were compared for fluid administration, achievement of resuscitation targets, vasoactive agents use, and major outcomes such as organ dysfunction and support, length of stay, and 28-day mortality. RESULTS: FR could be determined in 348 patients at baseline. Two hundred and forty-two patients (70%) were categorized as fluid responders. Both groups achieved comparable successful resuscitation targets, although non-fluid responders received less resuscitation fluids (0 [0-500] vs. 1500 [1000-2500] mL; p 0.0001), exhibited less positive fluid balances, but received more vasopressor testing. No difference in clinically relevant outcomes between FR+ and FR- patients was found, including 24-h SOFA score (9 [5-12] vs. 8 [5-11], p = 0.4), need for MV (78% vs. 72%, p = 0.16), need for RRT (18% vs. 21%, p = 0.7), ICU-LOS (6 [3-11] vs. 6 [3-16] days, p = 0.2), and 28-day mortality (40% vs. 36%, p = 0.5). Only thirteen patients remained fluid responsive along the intervention period. CONCLUSIONS: Systematic assessment allowed determination of fluid responsiveness status in more than 80% of patients with early septic shock. Fluid boluses could be stopped in non-fluid responsive patients without any negative impact on clinical relevant outcomes. Our results suggest that fluid resuscitation might be safely guided by FR assessment in septic shock patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT03078712. Registered retrospectively on March 13, 2017.

Design and Evaluation of a Low-Cost Bronchoscopy-Guided Percutaneous Dilatational Tracheostomy Simulator.

INTRODUCTION: Bronchoscopy-guided percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy (BG-PDT) is an invasive procedure regularly performed in the intensive care unit. Risk of serious complications have been estimated in up to 5%, focused during the learning phase. We have not found any published formal training protocols, and commercial simulators are costly and not widely available in some countries. The objective of this study was to present the design and simulator performance of a low-cost BG-PDT simulator. METHODS: A simulator was designed with materials available in a hardware store, synthetic skin pads, ex vivo bovine tracheas, and a pipe inspection camera. The simulator was tested in 8 experts and 9 novices. Sessions were video recorded, and participants were equipped with the Imperial College Surgical Device, a hand motion-tracking device. Performance was evaluated with a multimodal approach, including first attempt success rate, global success rate, total procedural time, Imperial College Surgical Device-derived proficiency parameters, and global rating scale applied blindly by 2 expert observers. A satisfaction survey was applied after the procedure. RESULTS: A simulator was successfully constructed, allowing multiple iterations per assembly, with a fixed cost of US $30 and $4 per use. Experts had greater global and first attempt success rate, performed the procedure faster, and with greater proficiency. It presented high user satisfaction and fidelity. CONCLUSIONS: A low-cost BG-PDT simulator was successfully constructed, with the ability to discriminate between experts and novices, and with high fidelity. Considering its ease of construction and cost, it can be replicated in almost any intensive care unit.

[Assessment for learning: experience in an undergraduate medical theoretical course]. / Evaluación para el aprendizaje: experiencia en un curso teórico de pregrado en medicina.

BACKGROUND: Assessment for learning is a paradigm that is taking shape in the field of medical education. This approach aims to embed the assessment process within the educational and learning process. AIM: To evaluate the impact of curricular changes, from a focus of assessment of learning to one of assessment for learning, in the perception of undergraduate students of medicine and their final grades obtained in a theoretical course (TCG). MATERIAL AND METHODS: In the year 2011 lectures were reduced and intermediate assessments followed by a feedback session were introduced. The activities of each program course, surveys about student perceptions of the course and the final grades of students (assessments with multiple choice questions) were compared between the periods prior and after curricular changes (2005-2010 and 2011-2013). RESULTS: As a consequence of curricular changes, time for lectures was reduced by 19.5%, time for summative assessments was increased by 8.5%, and feedback activity, occupying 7.3% of the course time was added. There were significant improvements in student is perceptions in all areas assessed by surveys, emphasizing feedback and assessments. The overall grade assigned to the course dictated after implementing the changes increased from 6.18 to 6.59 (p < 0.001, 1-7 scale). The grades of students also improved from an average of 5.78 to 6.43 (p < 0.001, 1-7 scale). CONCLUSIONS: Assessment for learning achieved the desired educational impact without increasing the assigned curricular time. Programmatic assessment is favorably perceived by students.

Evaluación para el aprendizaje: experiencia en un curso teórico de pregrado en medicina / Assessment for learning: experience in an undergraduate medical theoretical course

Background: Assessment for learning is a paradigm that is taking shape in the field of medical education. This approach aims to embed the assessment process within the educational and learning process. Aim: To evaluate the impact of curricular changes, from a focus of assessment of learning to one of assessment for learning, in the perception of undergraduate students of medicine and their final grades obtained in a theoretical course (TCG). Material and Methods: In the year 2011 lectures were reduced and intermediate assessments followed by a feedback session were introduced. The activities of each program course, surveys about student perceptions of the course and the final grades of students (assessments with multiple choice questions) were compared between the periods prior and after curricular changes (2005-2010 and 2011-2013). Results: As a consequence of curricular changes, time for lectures was reduced by 19.5%, time for summative assessments was increased by 8.5%, and feedback activity, occupying 7.3% of the course time was added. There were significant improvements in student is perceptions in all areas assessed by surveys, emphasizing feedback and assessments. The overall grade assigned to the course dictated after implementing the changes increased from 6.18 to 6.59 (p < 0.001, 1-7 scale). The grades of students also improved from an average of 5.78 to 6.43 (p < 0.001, 1-7 scale). Conclusions: Assessment for learning achieved the desired educational impact without increasing the assigned curricular time. Programmatic assessment is favorably perceived by students.