[Recommendations for the management of critically ill patients with COVID-19 in Intensive Care Units]. / Recomendaciones para el manejo de los pacientes críticos con COVID-19 en las Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos.

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to the admission of a high number of patients to the ICU, generally due to severe respiratory failure. Since the appearance of the first cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection, at the end of 2019, in China, a huge number of treatment recommendations for this entity have been published, not always supported by sufficient scientific evidence or with methodological rigor necessary. Thanks to the efforts of different groups of researchers, we currently have the results of clinical trials, and other types of studies, of higher quality. We consider it necessary to create a document that includes recommendations that collect this evidence regarding the diagnosis and treatment of COVID-19, but also aspects that other guidelines have not considered and that we consider essential in the management of critical patients with COVID-19. For this, a drafting committee has been created, made up of members of the SEMICYUC Working Groups more directly related to different specific aspects of the management of these patients.

Recommendations for the management of critically ill patients with COVID-19 in Intensive Care Units.

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to the admission of a high number of patients to the ICU, generally due to severe respiratory failure. Since the appearance of the first cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection, at the end of 2019, in China, a huge number of treatment recommendations for this entity have been published, not always supported by sufficient scientific evidence or with methodological rigor necessary. Thanks to the efforts of different groups of researchers, we currently have the results of clinical trials, and other types of studies, of higher quality. We consider it necessary to create a document that includes recommendations that collect this evidence regarding the diagnosis and treatment of COVID-19, but also aspects that other guidelines have not considered and that we consider essential in the management of critical patients with COVID-19. For this, a drafting committee has been created, made up of members of the SEMICYUC Working Groups more directly related to different specific aspects of the management of these patients.

Fate of rejected manuscripts in the journal Medicina Intensiva during 2015-2017 period. / Destino de los artículos rechazados en Medicina Intensiva en el período 2015-2017.

OBJECTIVE: To know the fate of the rejected manuscripts in Medicina Intensiva journal (MI) from 2015 to 2017 with surveillance until 2019. DESIGN: Retrospective observational study. SETTING: Biomedical journals publication. PARTICIPANTS: Rejected manuscripts in MI journal. INTERVENTIONS: None. MAIN VARIABLES OF INTEREST: Time of publication, impact factor (IF), generated citations and variables associated to publication. RESULTS: The 69% (420) of analyzed articles (344 originals and 263 scientific letters) were rejected, and 205 (48.8%) were subsequently published, with 180 citations of 66 articles. Journal IF was lower in 173 (84.4%) articles. The number of FI-valid citations was higher than the FI of MI in 21 articles. Origin of manuscript OR 2,11 (IC 95% 1.29 - 3.46), female author OR 1.58 (IC 95% 1.03-2.44), english language OR 2,38 (IC 95% 1.41-4.0) and reviewed papers OR 1.71 (IC 95% 1.10-2.66) were associated to publication in PubMed database. CONCLUSIONS: The rejected articles in MI have a mean publication rate in other journals. Most of these articles are published in journals with less IF and fewer citations than the IF of MI.

Fate of rejected manuscripts in the journal Medicina Intensiva during 2015-2017 period.

OBJECTIVE: To know the fate of the rejected manuscripts in Medicina Intensiva journal (MI) from 2015 to 2017 with surveillance until 2019. DESIGN: Retrospective observational study. SETTING: Biomedical journals publication. PARTICIPANTS: Rejected manuscripts in MI journal. INTERVENTIONS: None. MAIN VARIABLES OF INTEREST: Time of publication, impact factor (IF), generated citations and variables associated to publication. RESULTS: The 69% (420) of analyzed articles (344 originals and 263 scientific letters) were rejected, and 205 (48.8%) were subsequently published, with 180 citations of 66 articles. Journal IF was lower in 173 (84.4%) articles. The number of FI-valid citations was higher than the FI of MI in 21 articles. Origin of manuscript OR 2,11 (IC 95% 1.29-3.46), female author OR 1.58 (IC 95% 1.03-2.44), english language OR 2,38 (IC 95% 1.41-4.0) and reviewed papers OR 1.71 (IC 95% 1.10-2.66) were associated to publication in PubMed database. CONCLUSIONS: The rejected articles in MI have a mean publication rate in other journals. Most of these articles are published in journals with less IF and fewer citations than the IF of MI.

[Selection of pacemaker stimulation mode]. / Selección del modo de estimulación del marcapasos.

Permanent cardiac pacing is a widely recognized therapy used for the treatment of several types of bradycardia, atrioventricular (AV) block and sinoatrial node disease mainly. In the beginning, implantable cardiac pacemakers stimulated just one cardiac chamber and right ventricule pacing were the most frequently used devices. In the 1980s, pacemaker's technology focus on restoring AV synchrony, named <> cardiac pacing, allowing the development of dual-chamber pacemakers (DDD, DDDR). Even though theoretical advantages of dual-chamber devices, its implantation is more complicated and expensive. For these reasons, the selection of the optimum mode of pacing is still controversial. Nowadays, available results from many trials that analyze clinical and physiological benefits of the different pacing modes, allow us to conclude that physiologic pacemakers reduce the risk of atrial fibrillation but do not improve survival and do not reduce the risk of stroke. By other hand, the reduction of pacemaker syndrome is not a constant finding in all the trials. In our clinical practice, when we have to select the pacing mode we have to take in account these results together with other factors as patient's characteristics (age, comorbility and life expectansy). Also, data from cost-effectiveness analysis should be added to the available information for the making decision.