Effect of the P-Selectin Inhibitor Crizanlizumab on Survival Free of Organ Support in Patients Hospitalized for COVID-19: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has been associated with endothelial injury, resultant microvascular inflammation and thrombosis. Activated endothelial cells release and express P-selectin and von Willebrand factor, both of which are elevated in severe COVID-19 and may be implicated in the disease pathophysiology. We hypothesized that crizanlizumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody to P-selectin, would reduce morbidity and death in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. METHODS: An international, adaptive, randomized controlled platform trial, funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, randomly assigned 422 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 with moderate or severe illness to receive either a single infusion of the P-selectin inhibitor crizanlizumab (at a dose of 5 mg/kg) plus standard of care or standard of care alone in an open-label 1:1 ratio. The primary outcome was organ support-free days, evaluated on an ordinal scale consisting of the number of days alive free of organ support through the first 21 days after trial entry. RESULTS: The study was stopped for futility by the data safety monitoring committee. Among 421 randomized patients with known 21-day outcomes, 163 patients (77%) randomized to the crizanlizumab plus standard-of-care arm did not require any respiratory or cardiovascular organ support compared with 169 (80%) in the standard-of-care-alone arm. The adjusted odds ratio for the effect of crizanlizumab on organ support-free days was 0.70 (95% CI, 0.43-1.16), where an odds ratio >1 indicates treatment benefit, yielding a posterior probability of futility (odds ratio <1.2) of 98% and a posterior probability of inferiority (odds ratio <1.0) of 91%. Overall, there were 37 deaths (17.5%) in the crizanlizumab arm and 27 deaths (12.8%) in the standard-of-care arm (hazard ratio, 1.33 [95% CrI, 0.85-2.21]; [probability of hazard ratio>1] = 0.879). CONCLUSIONS: Crizanlizumab, a P-selectin inhibitor, did not result in improvement in organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: NCT04505774.

Therapeutic Anticoagulation with Heparin in Critically Ill Patients with Covid-19.

BACKGROUND: Thrombosis and inflammation may contribute to morbidity and mortality among patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). We hypothesized that therapeutic-dose anticoagulation would improve outcomes in critically ill patients with Covid-19. METHODS: In an open-label, adaptive, multiplatform, randomized clinical trial, critically ill patients with severe Covid-19 were randomly assigned to a pragmatically defined regimen of either therapeutic-dose anticoagulation with heparin or pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis in accordance with local usual care. The primary outcome was organ support-free days, evaluated on an ordinal scale that combined in-hospital death (assigned a value of -1) and the number of days free of cardiovascular or respiratory organ support up to day 21 among patients who survived to hospital discharge. RESULTS: The trial was stopped when the prespecified criterion for futility was met for therapeutic-dose anticoagulation. Data on the primary outcome were available for 1098 patients (534 assigned to therapeutic-dose anticoagulation and 564 assigned to usual-care thromboprophylaxis). The median value for organ support-free days was 1 (interquartile range, -1 to 16) among the patients assigned to therapeutic-dose anticoagulation and was 4 (interquartile range, -1 to 16) among the patients assigned to usual-care thromboprophylaxis (adjusted proportional odds ratio, 0.83; 95% credible interval, 0.67 to 1.03; posterior probability of futility [defined as an odds ratio <1.2], 99.9%). The percentage of patients who survived to hospital discharge was similar in the two groups (62.7% and 64.5%, respectively; adjusted odds ratio, 0.84; 95% credible interval, 0.64 to 1.11). Major bleeding occurred in 3.8% of the patients assigned to therapeutic-dose anticoagulation and in 2.3% of those assigned to usual-care pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis. CONCLUSIONS: In critically ill patients with Covid-19, an initial strategy of therapeutic-dose anticoagulation with heparin did not result in a greater probability of survival to hospital discharge or a greater number of days free of cardiovascular or respiratory organ support than did usual-care pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis. (REMAP-CAP, ACTIV-4a, and ATTACC ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT02735707, NCT04505774, NCT04359277, and NCT04372589.).

Therapeutic Anticoagulation with Heparin in Noncritically Ill Patients with Covid-19.

BACKGROUND: Thrombosis and inflammation may contribute to the risk of death and complications among patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). We hypothesized that therapeutic-dose anticoagulation may improve outcomes in noncritically ill patients who are hospitalized with Covid-19. METHODS: In this open-label, adaptive, multiplatform, controlled trial, we randomly assigned patients who were hospitalized with Covid-19 and who were not critically ill (which was defined as an absence of critical care-level organ support at enrollment) to receive pragmatically defined regimens of either therapeutic-dose anticoagulation with heparin or usual-care pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis. The primary outcome was organ support-free days, evaluated on an ordinal scale that combined in-hospital death (assigned a value of -1) and the number of days free of cardiovascular or respiratory organ support up to day 21 among patients who survived to hospital discharge. This outcome was evaluated with the use of a Bayesian statistical model for all patients and according to the baseline d-dimer level. RESULTS: The trial was stopped when prespecified criteria for the superiority of therapeutic-dose anticoagulation were met. Among 2219 patients in the final analysis, the probability that therapeutic-dose anticoagulation increased organ support-free days as compared with usual-care thromboprophylaxis was 98.6% (adjusted odds ratio, 1.27; 95% credible interval, 1.03 to 1.58). The adjusted absolute between-group difference in survival until hospital discharge without organ support favoring therapeutic-dose anticoagulation was 4.0 percentage points (95% credible interval, 0.5 to 7.2). The final probability of the superiority of therapeutic-dose anticoagulation over usual-care thromboprophylaxis was 97.3% in the high d-dimer cohort, 92.9% in the low d-dimer cohort, and 97.3% in the unknown d-dimer cohort. Major bleeding occurred in 1.9% of the patients receiving therapeutic-dose anticoagulation and in 0.9% of those receiving thromboprophylaxis. CONCLUSIONS: In noncritically ill patients with Covid-19, an initial strategy of therapeutic-dose anticoagulation with heparin increased the probability of survival to hospital discharge with reduced use of cardiovascular or respiratory organ support as compared with usual-care thromboprophylaxis. (ATTACC, ACTIV-4a, and REMAP-CAP ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT04372589, NCT04505774, NCT04359277, and NCT02735707.).

An Update on Curing Coma Campaign.

The Curing Coma Campaign (CCC) and its contributing collaborators identified multiple key areas of knowledge and research gaps in coma and disorders of consciousness (DoC). This step was a crucial effort and essential to prioritize future educational and research efforts. These key areas include defining categories of DoC, assessing DoC using multimodal approach (e.g., behavioral assessment tools, advanced neuroimaging studies), discussing optimal clinical trials' design and exploring computational models to conduct clinical trials in patients with DoC, and establishing common data elements to standardize data collection. Other key areas focused on creating coma care registry and educating clinicians and patients and promoting awareness of DoC to improve care in patients with DoC. The ongoing efforts in these key areas are discussed.

Guidelines for Neuroprognostication in Critically Ill Adults with Intracerebral Hemorrhage.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this document is to provide recommendations on the formal reliability of major clinical predictors often associated with intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) neuroprognostication. METHODS: A narrative systematic review was completed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology and the Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome, Timing, Setting questions. Predictors, which included both individual clinical variables and prediction models, were selected based on clinical relevance and attention in the literature. Following construction of the evidence profile and summary of findings, recommendations were based on Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria. Good practice statements addressed essential principles of neuroprognostication that could not be framed in the Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome, Timing, Setting format. RESULTS: Six candidate clinical variables and two clinical grading scales (the original ICH score and maximally treated ICH score) were selected for recommendation creation. A total of 347 articles out of 10,751 articles screened met our eligibility criteria. Consensus statements of good practice included deferring neuroprognostication-aside from the most clinically devastated patients-for at least the first 48-72 h of intensive care unit admission; understanding what outcomes would have been most valued by the patient; and counseling of patients and surrogates whose ultimate neurological recovery may occur over a variable period of time. Although many clinical variables and grading scales are associated with ICH poor outcome, no clinical variable alone or sole clinical grading scale was suggested by the panel as currently being reliable by itself for use in counseling patients with ICH and their surrogates, regarding functional outcome at 3 months and beyond or 30-day mortality. CONCLUSIONS: These guidelines provide recommendations on the formal reliability of predictors of poor outcome in the context of counseling patients with ICH and surrogates and suggest broad principles of neuroprognostication. Clinicians formulating their judgments of prognosis for patients with ICH should avoid anchoring bias based solely on any one clinical variable or published clinical grading scale.

Guidelines for neuroprognostication in adults with traumatic spinal cord injury.

BACKGROUND: Traumatic spinal cord injury (tSCI) impacts patients and their families acutely and often for the long term. The ability of clinicians to share prognostic information about mortality and functional outcomes allows patients and their surrogates to engage in decision-making and plan for the future. These guidelines provide recommendations on the reliability of acute-phase clinical predictors to inform neuroprognostication and guide clinicians in counseling adult patients with tSCI or their surrogates. METHODS: A narrative systematic review was completed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology. Candidate predictors, including clinical variables and prediction models, were selected based on clinical relevance and presence of an appropriate body of evidence. The Population/Intervention/Comparator/Outcome/Timing/Setting question was framed as "When counseling patients or surrogates of critically ill patients with traumatic spinal cord injury, should < predictor, with time of assessment if appropriate > be considered a reliable predictor of < outcome, with time frame of assessment >?" Additional full-text screening criteria were used to exclude small and lower quality studies. Following construction of an evidence profile and summary of findings, recommendations were based on four Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria: quality of evidence, balance of desirable and undesirable consequences, values and preferences, and resource use. Good practice recommendations addressed essential principles of neuroprognostication that could not be framed in the Population/Intervention/Comparator/Outcome/Timing/Setting format. Throughout the guideline development process, an individual living with tSCI provided perspective on patient-centered priorities. RESULTS: Six candidate clinical variables and one prediction model were selected. Out of 11,132 articles screened, 369 met inclusion criteria for full-text review and 35 articles met eligibility criteria to guide recommendations. We recommend pathologic findings on magnetic resonance imaging, neurological level of injury, and severity of injury as moderately reliable predictors of American Spinal Cord Injury Impairment Scale improvement and the Dutch Clinical Prediction Rule as a moderately reliable prediction model of independent ambulation at 1 year after injury. No other reliable or moderately reliable predictors of mortality or functional outcome were identified. Good practice recommendations include considering the complete clinical condition as opposed to a single variable and communicating the challenges of likely functional deficits as well as potential for improvement and for long-term quality of life with SCI-related deficits to patients and surrogates. CONCLUSIONS: These guidelines provide recommendations about the reliability of acute-phase predictors of mortality, functional outcome, American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale grade conversion, and recovery of independent ambulation for consideration when counseling patients with tSCI or their surrogates and suggest broad principles of neuroprognostication in this context.

Guidelines for Neuroprognostication in Critically Ill Adults with Moderate-Severe Traumatic Brain Injury.

BACKGROUND: Moderate-severe traumatic brain injury (msTBI) carries high morbidity and mortality worldwide. Accurate neuroprognostication is essential in guiding clinical decisions, including patient triage and transition to comfort measures. Here we provide recommendations regarding the reliability of major clinical predictors and prediction models commonly used in msTBI neuroprognostication, guiding clinicians in counseling surrogate decision-makers. METHODS: Using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology, we conducted a systematic narrative review of the most clinically relevant predictors and prediction models cited in the literature. The review involved framing specific population/intervention/comparator/outcome/timing/setting (PICOTS) questions and employing stringent full-text screening criteria to examine the literature, focusing on four GRADE criteria: quality of evidence, desirability of outcomes, values and preferences, and resource use. Moreover, good practice recommendations addressing the key principles of neuroprognostication were drafted. RESULTS: After screening 8125 articles, 41 met our eligibility criteria. Ten clinical variables and nine grading scales were selected. Many articles varied in defining "poor" functional outcomes. For consistency, we treated "poor" as "unfavorable". Although many clinical variables are associated with poor outcome in msTBI, only the presence of bilateral pupillary nonreactivity on admission, conditional on accurate assessment without confounding from medications or injuries, was deemed moderately reliable for counseling surrogates regarding 6-month functional outcomes or in-hospital mortality. In terms of prediction models, the Corticosteroid Randomization After Significant Head Injury (CRASH)-basic, CRASH-CT (CRASH-basic extended by computed tomography features), International Mission for Prognosis and Analysis of Clinical Trials in TBI (IMPACT)-core, IMPACT-extended, and IMPACT-lab models were recommended as moderately reliable in predicting 14-day to 6-month mortality and functional outcomes at 6 months and beyond. When using "moderately reliable" predictors or prediction models, the clinician must acknowledge "substantial" uncertainty in the prognosis. CONCLUSIONS: These guidelines provide recommendations to clinicians on the formal reliability of individual predictors and prediction models of poor outcome when counseling surrogates of patients with msTBI and suggest broad principles of neuroprognostication.

Guidelines for Neuroprognostication in Comatose Adult Survivors of Cardiac Arrest.

BACKGROUND: Among cardiac arrest survivors, about half remain comatose 72 h following return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC). Prognostication of poor neurological outcome in this population may result in withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy and death. The objective of this article is to provide recommendations on the reliability of select clinical predictors that serve as the basis of neuroprognostication and provide guidance to clinicians counseling surrogates of comatose cardiac arrest survivors. METHODS: A narrative systematic review was completed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Candidate predictors, which included clinical variables and prediction models, were selected based on clinical relevance and the presence of an appropriate body of evidence. The Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome, Timing, Setting (PICOTS) question was framed as follows: "When counseling surrogates of comatose adult survivors of cardiac arrest, should [predictor, with time of assessment if appropriate] be considered a reliable predictor of poor functional outcome assessed at 3 months or later?" Additional full-text screening criteria were used to exclude small and lower-quality studies. Following construction of the evidence profile and summary of findings, recommendations were based on four GRADE criteria: quality of evidence, balance of desirable and undesirable consequences, values and preferences, and resource use. In addition, good practice recommendations addressed essential principles of neuroprognostication that could not be framed in PICOTS format. RESULTS: Eleven candidate clinical variables and three prediction models were selected based on clinical relevance and the presence of an appropriate body of literature. A total of 72 articles met our eligibility criteria to guide recommendations. Good practice recommendations include waiting 72 h following ROSC/rewarming prior to neuroprognostication, avoiding sedation or other confounders, the use of multimodal assessment, and an extended period of observation for awakening in patients with an indeterminate prognosis, if consistent with goals of care. The bilateral absence of pupillary light response > 72 h from ROSC and the bilateral absence of N20 response on somatosensory evoked potential testing were identified as reliable predictors. Computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging of the brain > 48 h from ROSC and electroencephalography > 72 h from ROSC were identified as moderately reliable predictors. CONCLUSIONS: These guidelines provide recommendations on the reliability of predictors of poor outcome in the context of counseling surrogates of comatose survivors of cardiac arrest and suggest broad principles of neuroprognostication. Few predictors were considered reliable or moderately reliable based on the available body of evidence.

Guidelines for Neuroprognostication in Adults with Guillain-Barré Syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) often carries a favorable prognosis. Of adult patients with GBS, 10-30% require mechanical ventilation during the acute phase of the disease. After the acute phase, the focus shifts to restoration of motor strength, ambulation, and neurological function, with variable speed and degree of recovery. The objective of these guidelines is to provide recommendations on the reliability of select clinical predictors that serve as the basis of neuroprognostication and provide guidance to clinicians counseling adult patients with GBS and/or their surrogates. METHODS: A narrative systematic review was completed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Candidate predictors, including clinical variables and prediction models, were selected based on clinical relevance and presence of appropriate body of evidence. The Population/Intervention/Comparator/Outcome/Time frame/Setting (PICOTS) question was framed as follows: "When counseling patients or surrogates of critically ill patients with Guillain-Barré syndrome, should [predictor, with time of assessment if appropriate] be considered a reliable predictor of [outcome, with time frame of assessment]?" Additional full-text screening criteria were used to exclude small and lower quality studies. Following construction of an evidence profile and summary of findings, recommendations were based on four GRADE criteria: quality of evidence, balance of desirable and undesirable consequences, values and preferences, and resource use. In addition, good practice recommendations addressed essential principles of neuroprognostication that could not be framed in PICOTS format. RESULTS: Eight candidate clinical variables and six prediction models were selected. A total of 45 articles met our eligibility criteria to guide recommendations. We recommend bulbar weakness (the degree of motor weakness at disease nadir) and the Erasmus GBS Respiratory Insufficiency Score as moderately reliable for prediction of the need for mechanical ventilation. The Erasmus GBS Outcome Score (EGOS) and modified EGOS were identified as moderately reliable predictors of independent ambulation at 3 months and beyond. Good practice recommendations include consideration of both acute and recovery phases of the disease during prognostication, discussion of the possible need for mechanical ventilation and enteral nutrition during counseling, and consideration of the complete clinical condition as opposed to a single variable during prognostication. CONCLUSIONS: These guidelines provide recommendations on the reliability of predictors of the need for mechanical ventilation, poor functional outcome, and independent ambulation following GBS in the context of counseling patients and/or surrogates and suggest broad principles of neuroprognostication. Few predictors were considered moderately reliable based on the available body of evidence, and higher quality data are needed.

The Curing Coma Campaign and the Future of Coma Research.

Recovery from coma or disordered consciousness is a central issue in patients with acute brain injuries such as stroke, trauma, cardiac arrest, and brain infections. Yet, major gaps remain in the scientific underpinnings of coma and this has led to inaccuracy in prognostication and limited interventions for coma recovery. Even so, recent studies have begun to elucidate mechanisms of consciousness early and prolonged after acute brain injury and some pilot interventions have begun to be tested. The importance and scope of this led in 2019 to the development of the Curing Coma Campaign, an initiative of the Neurocritical Care Society designed to provide a platform for scientific collaboration across the patient care continuum and to empower a community for purposes of research, education, implementation science, and advocacy. Seen as a "grand challenge," the Curing Coma Campaign has developed an infrastructure of scientific working groups and operational modules, along with a 10-year roadmap.

Effect of P2Y12 Inhibitors on Survival Free of Organ Support Among Non-Critically Ill Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Platelets represent a potential therapeutic target for improved clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective: To evaluate the benefits and risks of adding a P2Y12 inhibitor to anticoagulant therapy among non-critically ill patients hospitalized for COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: An open-label, bayesian, adaptive randomized clinical trial including 562 non-critically ill patients hospitalized for COVID-19 was conducted between February 2021 and June 2021 at 60 hospitals in Brazil, Italy, Spain, and the US. The date of final 90-day follow-up was September 15, 2021. Interventions: Patients were randomized to a therapeutic dose of heparin plus a P2Y12 inhibitor (n = 293) or a therapeutic dose of heparin only (usual care) (n = 269) in a 1:1 ratio for 14 days or until hospital discharge, whichever was sooner. Ticagrelor was the preferred P2Y12 inhibitor. Main Outcomes and Measures: The composite primary outcome was organ support-free days evaluated on an ordinal scale that combined in-hospital death (assigned a value of -1) and, for those who survived to hospital discharge, the number of days free of respiratory or cardiovascular organ support up to day 21 of the index hospitalization (range, -1 to 21 days; higher scores indicate less organ support and better outcomes). The primary safety outcome was major bleeding by 28 days as defined by the International Society on Thrombosis and Hemostasis. Results: Enrollment of non-critically ill patients was discontinued when the prespecified criterion for futility was met. All 562 patients who were randomized (mean age, 52.7 [SD, 13.5] years; 41.5% women) completed the trial and 87% received a therapeutic dose of heparin by the end of study day 1. In the P2Y12 inhibitor group, ticagrelor was used in 63% of patients and clopidogrel in 37%. The median number of organ support-free days was 21 days (IQR, 20-21 days) among patients in the P2Y12 inhibitor group and was 21 days (IQR, 21-21 days) in the usual care group (adjusted odds ratio, 0.83 [95% credible interval, 0.55-1.25]; posterior probability of futility [defined as an odds ratio <1.2], 96%). Major bleeding occurred in 6 patients (2.0%) in the P2Y12 inhibitor group and in 2 patients (0.7%) in the usual care group (adjusted odds ratio, 3.31 [95% CI, 0.64-17.2]; P = .15). Conclusions and Relevance: Among non-critically ill patients hospitalized for COVID-19, the use of a P2Y12 inhibitor in addition to a therapeutic dose of heparin, compared with a therapeutic dose of heparin only, did not result in an increased odds of improvement in organ support-free days within 21 days during hospitalization. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04505774.

Challenges in ICU Care: The Patient With Parkinson's Disease.

Patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) face unique challenges when admitted to the hospital. The nature of the disease, complexity of the pharmacotherapeutic home regimens, and the medication-related policies of institutionalized care all contribute to the challenges patients and providers face. In addition, medication errors are common in this population. Incorrectly ordered or omitted home medications or delayed administration can have significant negative consequences including worsening of PD symptoms, dopamine agonist withdrawal syndrome, or malignant or hyperpyrexia syndrome. Also, this patient population may commonly encounter contraindicated medications ordered during their hospitalizations. These medication misadventures negatively affect patient care, which may lead to increased length of stay and significant adverse sequalae. Nurses, pharmacists, and other health care providers can help ease the anxiety of patients and their families by taking detailed medication histories, restarting home medication regimens, customizing medication administration to fit patients' needs, and screening patient profiles for drug-drug and drug-disease interactions. Education of hospital staff regarding the unique needs of this patient population and seeking the advice of specialists in PD can also promote improved patient care.

Heparin Dose Intensity and Organ Support-Free Days in Patients Hospitalized for COVID-19.

Background: Clinical trials suggest that therapeutic-dose heparin may prevent critical illness and vascular complications due to COVID-19, but knowledge gaps exist regarding the efficacy of therapeutic heparin including its comparative effect relative to intermediate-dose anticoagulation. Objectives: The authors performed 2 complementary secondary analyses of a completed randomized clinical trial: 1) a prespecified per-protocol analysis; and 2) an exploratory dose-based analysis to compare the effect of therapeutic-dose heparin with low- and intermediate-dose heparin. Methods: Patients who received initial anticoagulation dosed consistently with randomization were included. The primary outcome was organ support-free days (OSFDs), a combination of in-hospital death and days free of organ support through day 21. Results: Among 2,860 participants, 1,761 (92.8%) noncritically ill and 857 (89.1%) critically ill patients were treated per-protocol. Among noncritically ill per-protocol patients, the posterior probability that therapeutic-dose heparin improved OSFDs as compared with usual care was 99.3% (median adjusted OR: 1.36; 95% credible interval [CrI]: 1.07-1.74). Therapeutic heparin had a high posterior probability of efficacy relative to both low- (94.6%; adjusted OR: 1.26; 95% CrI: 0.95-1.64) and intermediate- (99.8%; adjusted OR: 1.80; 95% CrI: 1.22-2.62) dose thromboprophylaxis. Among critically ill per-protocol patients, the posterior probability that therapeutic heparin improved outcomes was low. Conclusions: Among noncritically ill patients hospitalized for COVID-19 who were randomized to and initially received therapeutic-dose anticoagulation, heparin, compared with usual care, was associated with improved OSFDs, a combination of in-hospital death and days free of organ support. Therapeutic heparin appeared superior to both low- and intermediate-dose thromboprophylaxis.

Hypertonic saline use in neurocritical care for treating cerebral edema: A review of optimal formulation, dosing, safety, administration and storage.

PURPOSE: Current Neurocritical Care Society guidelines on the management of cerebral edema recommend hypertonic saline (HTS) over mannitol in some scenarios, but practical questions remain regarding the appropriate administration method, concentration/dose, monitoring to ensure safe use, and storage. The aim of this article is to address these practical concerns based on the evidence currently available. SUMMARY: Many different hypertonic solutions have been studied to define the optimal hyperosmolar substance to relieve acute cerebral edema in patients with conditions such as acute ischemic stroke, intracerebral hemorrhage, subarachnoid hemorrhage, and traumatic brain injury. Mannitol and HTS are the main hyperosmolar therapies in use in contemporary neurocritical care practice. Contemporary use of HTS has followed a circuitous path in regards to the practical aspects of dosing and formulation, with evidence mainly consisting of retrospective or observational data. The effectiveness of bolus doses of HTS to lower acutely elevated intracranial pressure is well accepted. Adverse events with use of HTS are often mild and non-clinically significant if appropriate monitoring of serum sodium and chloride concentrations is performed. Available evidence shows that peripheral administration of HTS is likely safe in certain circumstances. Timely utilization of HTS is complicated by regulatory requirements for safe storage, but with appropriate safeguards HTS can be stored in patient care areas. CONCLUSION: HTS formulations, methods of administration, infusion rate, and storage vary by institution, and no practice standards exist. Central intravenous administration may be preferred for HTS, but peripheral intravenous administration is safe provided measures are undertaken to detect and prevent phlebitis and extravasation. The safe use of HTS is possible with proper protocols, education, and institutional safeguards in place.

Comparison of thrombotic and clinical outcomes in SARS-CoV-2-pneumonia versus other viral pneumonia in an urban academic medical center.

BACKGROUND: Infection with viral pneumonia (PNA) is known to offset the coagulation cascade. Recent studies assessing novel SARS-CoV-2 infection observed a high frequency of systemic thrombotic events resulting in ambiguity if severity of infection or specific viral strain drive thrombosis and worsen clinical outcomes. Furthermore, limited data exists addressing SARS-CoV-2 in underrepresented patient populations. OBJECTIVES: Assess clinical outcomes events and death in patients diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia compared to patients with other types of viral pneumonia. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study evaluated electronic medical records in adult patients admitted to University of Illinois Hospital and Health Sciences System (UIHHSS) with primary diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 PNA or other viral (H1N1 or H3N2) PNA between 10/01/2017 and 09/01/2020. Primary composite outcome was the following event incidence rates: death, ICU admission, infection, thrombotic complications, mechanical ventilation, renal replacement therapy, and major bleeding. RESULTS: Of 257 patient records, 199 and 58 patients had SARS-CoV-2 PNA and other viral PNA, respectively. There was no difference in primary composite outcome. Thrombotic events (n = 6, 3%) occurred solely in SARS-CoV-2 PNA patients in the ICU. A significantly higher incidence of renal replacement therapy (8.5% vs 0%, p=0.016) and mortality (15.6% vs 3.4%, p=0.048) occurred in the SARS-CoV-2 PNA group. Multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed age, presence of SARS-CoV-2, and ICU admission, aOR 1.07, 11.37, and 41.95 respectively, was significantly associated with mortality risk during hospitalization; race and ethnicity were not. CONCLUSION: Low overall incidence of thrombotic events occurred only in the SARS-CoV-2 PNA group. SARS-CoV-2 PNA may lead to higher incidence of clinical events than those observed in H3N2/H1N1 viral pneumonia, and that race/ethnicity does not drive mortality outcomes.

Effect of therapeutic-dose heparin on severe acute kidney injury and death in noncritically ill patients hospitalized for COVID-19: a prespecified secondary analysis of the ACTIV4a and ATTACC randomized trial.

Background: Acute kidney injury (AKI) in patients with COVID-19 is partly mediated by thromboinflammation. In noncritically ill patients with COVID-19, therapeutic-dose anticoagulation with heparin increased the probability of survival to hospital discharge with reduced use of cardiovascular or respiratory organ support. Objectives: We investigated whether therapeutic-dose heparin reduces the incidence of AKI or death in noncritically ill patients hospitalized for COVID-19. Methods: We report a prespecified secondary analysis of the ACTIV4a and ATTACC open-label, multiplatform randomized trial of therapeutic-dose heparin vs usual-care pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis on the incidence of severe AKI (≥2-fold increase in serum creatinine or initiation of kidney replacement therapy (KDIGO stage 2 or 3) or all-cause mortality in noncritically ill patients hospitalized for COVID-19. Bayesian statistical models were adjusted for age, sex, D-dimer, enrollment period, country, site, and platform. Results: Among 1922 enrolled, 23 were excluded due to pre-existing end stage kidney disease and 205 were missing baseline or follow-up creatinine measurements. Severe AKI or death occurred in 4.4% participants assigned to therapeutic-dose heparin and 5.5% assigned to thromboprophylaxis (adjusted relative risk [aRR]: 0.72; 95% credible interval (CrI): 0.47, 1.10); the posterior probability of superiority for therapeutic-dose heparin (relative risk < 1.0) was 93.6%. Therapeutic-dose heparin was associated with a 97.7% probability of superiority to reduce the composite of stage 3 AKI or death (3.1% vs 4.6%; aRR: 0.64; 95% CrI: 0.40, 0.99) compared to thromboprophylaxis. Conclusion: Therapeutic-dose heparin was associated with a high probability of superiority to reduce the incidence of in-hospital severe AKI or death in patients hospitalized for COVID-19.

Effect of P2Y12 Inhibitors on Organ Support-Free Survival in Critically Ill Patients Hospitalized for COVID-19: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Platelet activation is a potential therapeutic target in patients with COVID-19. Objective: To evaluate the effect of P2Y12 inhibition among critically ill patients hospitalized for COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: This international, open-label, adaptive platform, 1:1 randomized clinical trial included critically ill (requiring intensive care-level support) patients hospitalized with COVID-19. Patients were enrolled between February 26, 2021, through June 22, 2022. Enrollment was discontinued on June 22, 2022, by the trial leadership in coordination with the study sponsor given a marked slowing of the enrollment rate of critically ill patients. Intervention: Participants were randomly assigned to receive a P2Y12 inhibitor or no P2Y12 inhibitor (usual care) for 14 days or until hospital discharge, whichever was sooner. Ticagrelor was the preferred P2Y12 inhibitor. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was organ support-free days, evaluated on an ordinal scale that combined in-hospital death and, for participants who survived to hospital discharge, the number of days free of cardiovascular or respiratory organ support up to day 21 of the index hospitalization. The primary safety outcome was major bleeding, as defined by the International Society on Thrombosis and Hemostasis. Results: At the time of trial termination, 949 participants (median [IQR] age, 56 [46-65] years; 603 male [63.5%]) had been randomly assigned, 479 to the P2Y12 inhibitor group and 470 to usual care. In the P2Y12 inhibitor group, ticagrelor was used in 372 participants (78.8%) and clopidogrel in 100 participants (21.2%). The estimated adjusted odds ratio (AOR) for the effect of P2Y12 inhibitor on organ support-free days was 1.07 (95% credible interval, 0.85-1.33). The posterior probability of superiority (defined as an OR > 1.0) was 72.9%. Overall, 354 participants (74.5%) in the P2Y12 inhibitor group and 339 participants (72.4%) in the usual care group survived to hospital discharge (median AOR, 1.15; 95% credible interval, 0.84-1.55; posterior probability of superiority, 80.8%). Major bleeding occurred in 13 participants (2.7%) in the P2Y12 inhibitor group and 13 (2.8%) in the usual care group. The estimated mortality rate at 90 days for the P2Y12 inhibitor group was 25.5% and for the usual care group was 27.0% (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.76-1.23; P = .77). Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial of critically ill participants hospitalized for COVID-19, treatment with a P2Y12 inhibitor did not improve the number of days alive and free of cardiovascular or respiratory organ support. The use of the P2Y12 inhibitor did not increase major bleeding compared with usual care. These data do not support routine use of a P2Y12 inhibitor in critically ill patients hospitalized for COVID-19. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04505774.

Treatment outcomes of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia in subarachnoid hemorrhage patients: a 4-year, retrospective single-center review.

INTRODUCTION: The treatment and outcomes of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) are not well described in neurosurgery patients. This study reviewed the treatment for HIT in subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) patients, and compared outcomes in patients with isolated HIT (iHIT) and HIT with thrombotic syndrome (HITTS). METHODS: Adult patients with SAH discharged from the University of Illinois Hospital & Health Sciences System from 2006 to 2009 were included if they had at least one positive HIT antibody test. Patients were categorized with either iHIT or HITTS based on documented evidence of thrombosis. The primary outcome was the incidence of new thromboses prior to discharge. Secondary outcomes included the incidence of major bleeding, new thromboses up to 3 months after discharge, or hospice/death. Patients having any secondary outcome were defined as having a "poor treatment-related effect". RESULTS: A total of 176 patients were screened and 30 patients met inclusion criteria. Eighteen patients (60 %) were categorized with iHIT and 12 (40 %) with HITTS. Twelve patients (67 %) with iHIT received prophylaxis with fondaparinux and nine patients (75 %) with HITTS were treated with argatroban. There were no differences in the primary (11 vs. 25 %, p = 0.364) or secondary outcomes in the iHIT group versus the HITTS group. Patients with iHIT had a 5.5 % incidence of "poor treatment-related effects" compared to a 33.3 % incidence in patients with HITTS (p = 0.024). CONCLUSIONS: SAH patients with iHIT and HITTS did not differ in the incidence of new thromboses, incidence of hemorrhage, or hospice/death. Patients with iHIT had fewer "poor treatment-related effects" than HITTS patients.