Continuous vs Intermittent ß-Lactam Antibiotic Infusions in Critically Ill Patients With Sepsis: The BLING III Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Whether ß-lactam antibiotics administered by continuous compared with intermittent infusion reduces the risk of death in patients with sepsis is uncertain. Objective: To evaluate whether continuous vs intermittent infusion of a ß-lactam antibiotic (piperacillin-tazobactam or meropenem) results in decreased all-cause mortality at 90 days in critically ill patients with sepsis. Design, Setting, and Participants: An international, open-label, randomized clinical trial conducted in 104 intensive care units (ICUs) in Australia, Belgium, France, Malaysia, New Zealand, Sweden, and the United Kingdom. Recruitment occurred from March 26, 2018, to January 11, 2023, with follow-up completed on April 12, 2023. Participants were critically ill adults (≥18 years) treated with piperacillin-tazobactam or meropenem for sepsis. Intervention: Eligible patients were randomized to receive an equivalent 24-hour dose of a ß-lactam antibiotic by either continuous (n = 3498) or intermittent (n = 3533) infusion for a clinician-determined duration of treatment or until ICU discharge, whichever occurred first. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was all-cause mortality within 90 days after randomization. Secondary outcomes were clinical cure up to 14 days after randomization; new acquisition, colonization, or infection with a multiresistant organism or Clostridioides difficile infection up to 14 days after randomization; ICU mortality; and in-hospital mortality. Results: Among 7202 randomized participants, 7031 (mean [SD] age, 59 [16] years; 2423 women [35%]) met consent requirements for inclusion in the primary analysis (97.6%). Within 90 days, 864 of 3474 patients (24.9%) assigned to receive continuous infusion had died compared with 939 of 3507 (26.8%) assigned intermittent infusion (absolute difference, -1.9% [95% CI, -4.9% to 1.1%]; odds ratio, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.81 to 1.01]; P = .08). Clinical cure was higher in the continuous vs intermittent infusion group (1930/3467 [55.7%] and 1744/3491 [50.0%], respectively; absolute difference, 5.7% [95% CI, 2.4% to 9.1%]). Other secondary outcomes were not statistically different. Conclusions and Relevance: The observed difference in 90-day mortality between continuous vs intermittent infusions of ß-lactam antibiotics did not meet statistical significance in the primary analysis. However, the confidence interval around the effect estimate includes the possibility of both no important effect and a clinically important benefit in the use of continuous infusions in this group of patients. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03213990.

Patient-important upper gastrointestinal bleeding in the ICU: A mixed-methods study of patient and family perspectives.

INTRODUCTION: The objective of this study was to create a definition of patient-important upper gastrointestinal bleeding during critical illness as an outcome for a randomized trial. DESIGN: This was a sequential mixed-methods qualitative-dominant multi-center study with an instrument-building aim. In semi-structured individual interviews or focus groups we elicited views from survivors of critical illness and family members of patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) regarding which features indicate important gastrointestinal bleeding. Quantitative demographic characteristics were collected. We analyzed qualitative data using inductive content analysis to develop a definition for patient-important upper gastrointestinal bleeding. SETTING: Canada and the United States. PARTICIPANTS: 51 ICU survivors and family members of ICU patients. RESULTS: Participants considered gastrointestinal bleeding to be important if it resulted in death, disability, or prolonged hospitalization. The following also signaled patient-important upper gastrointestinal bleeding: blood transfusion, vasopressors, endoscopy, CT-angiography, or surgery. Whether an intervention evinced concern depended on its effectiveness, side-effects, invasiveness and accessibility; contextual influences included participant familiarity and knowledge of interventions and trust in the clinical team. CONCLUSIONS: Survivors of critical illness and family members described patient-important upper gastrointestinal bleeding differently than current definitions of clinically-important upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

Patient-Level Meta-Analysis of Low-Dose Hydrocortisone in Adults with Septic Shock.

BACKGROUND: Trials and study-level meta-analyses have failed to resolve the role of corticosteroids in the management of patients with septic shock. Patient-level meta-analyses may provide more precise estimates of treatment effects, particularly subgroup effects. METHODS: We pooled individual patient data from septic shock trials investigating the adjunctive use of intravenous hydrocortisone. The primary outcome was 90-day all-cause mortality, and it was also analyzed across predefined subgroups. Secondary outcomes included mortality at intensive care unit and hospital discharge, at 28 and 180 days, and vasopressor-, ventilator-, and organ failure­free days. Adverse events included superinfection, muscle weakness, hyperglycemia, hypernatremia, and gastroduodenal bleeding. RESULTS: Of 24 eligible trials (n=8528), 17 (n=7882) provided individual patient data, and 7 (n=5929) provided 90-day mortality. The marginal relative risk (RR) for 90-day mortality of hydrocortisone versus placebo was 0.93 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.82 to 1.04; P=0.22; moderate certainty). It was 0.86 (95% CI, 0.79 to 0.92) for hydrocortisone with fludrocortisone and 0.96 (95% CI, 0.82 to 1.12) without fludrocortisone. There was no significant differential treatment effect across subgroups. Hydrocortisone was associated with little to no difference in any of the secondary outcomes except vasopressor-free days (mean difference, 1.24 days; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.73; high certainty). Hydrocortisone may not be associated with an increase in the risk of superinfection (RR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.95 to 1.15; low certainty), hyperglycemia (RR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.98 to 1.12; low certainty), or gastroduodenal bleeding (RR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.48; low certainty). Hydrocortisone may be associated with an increase in the risk of hypernatremia (RR, 2.01; 95% CI, 1.56 to 2.60; low certainty) and muscle weakness (n=2647; RR, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.49 to 1.99; low certainty). CONCLUSIONS: In this patient-level meta-analysis, hydrocortisone compared with placebo was not associated with reduced mortality for patients with septic shock. (Funded by "Programme d'Investissements d'Avenir," a research Professorship from the National Institute of Health and Care Research, Leadership Fellowships from the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia, and Emerging Leaders Fellowship from the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia; PROSPERO registration number, CRD42017062198.)