The Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine Position Statement on the Management of Sepsis in Resource-limited Settings.

Sepsis poses a significant global health challenge in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Several aspects of sepsis management recommended in international guidelines are often difficult or impossible to implement in resource-limited settings (RLS) due to issues related to cost, infrastructure, or lack of trained healthcare workers. The Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine (ISCCM) drafted a position statement for the management of sepsis in RLS focusing on India, facilitated by a task force of 18 intensivists using a Delphi process, to achieve consensus on various aspects of sepsis management which are challenging to implement in RLS. The process involved a comprehensive literature review, controlled feedback, and four iterative surveys conducted between 21 August 2023 and 21 September 2023. The domains addressed in the Delphi process included the need for a position statement, challenges in sepsis management, considerations for diagnosis, patient management while awaiting an intensive care unit (ICU) bed, and treatment of sepsis and septic shock in RLS. Consensus was achieved when 70% or more of the task force members voted either for or against statements using a Likert scale or a multiple-choice question (MCQ). The Delphi process with 100% participation of Task Force members in all rounds, generated consensus in 32 statements (91%) from which 20 clinical practice statements were drafted for the management of sepsis in RLS. The clinical practice statements will complement the existing international guidelines for the management of sepsis and provide valuable insights into tailoring sepsis interventions in the context of RLS, contributing to the global discourse on sepsis management. Future international guidelines should address the management of sepsis in RLS. How to cite this article: Juneja D, Nasa P, Chanchalani G, Cherian A, Jagiasi BG, Javeri Y, et al. The Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine Position Statement on the Management of Sepsis in Resource-limited Settings. Indian J Crit Care Med 2024;28(S2):S4-S19.

Renal Replacement Therapy in Adult Intensive Care Unit: An ISCCM Expert Panel Practice Recommendation.

Acute kidney injury (AKI) contributes significantly to morbidity and mortality in ICU patients. The cause of AKI may be multifactorial and the management strategies focus primarily on the prevention of AKI along with optimization of hemodynamics. However, those who do not respond to medical management may require renal replacement therapy (RRT). The various options include intermittent and continuous therapies. Continuous therapy is preferred in hemodynamically unstable patients requiring moderate to high dose vasoactive drugs. A multidisciplinary approach is advocated in the management of critically ill patients with multi-organ dysfunction in ICU. However, an intensivist is a primary physician involved in life-saving interventions and key decisions. This RRT practice recommendation has been made after appropriate discussion with intensivists and nephrologists representing diversified critical care practices in Indian ICUs. The basic aim of this document is to optimize renal replacement practices (initiation and management) with the help of trained intensivists in the management of AKI patients effectively and promptly. The recommendations represent opinions and practice patterns and are not based solely on evidence or a systematic literature review. However, various existing guidelines and literature have been reviewed to support the recommendations. A trained intensivist must be involved in the management of AKI patients in ICU at all levels of care, including identifying a patient requiring RRT, writing a prescription and its modification as per the patient's metabolic need, and discontinuation of therapy on renal recovery. Nevertheless, the involvement of the nephrology team in AKI management is paramount. Appropriate documentation is strongly recommended not only to ensure quality assurance but also to help future research as well. How to cite this article: Mishra RC, Sinha S, Govil D, Chatterjee R, Gupta V, Singhal V, et al. Renal Replacement Therapy in Adult Intensive Care Unit: An ISCCM Expert Panel Practice Recommendation. Indian J Crit Care Med 2022;26(S2):S3-S6.

ISCCM Guidelines on Acute Kidney Injury and Renal Replacement Therapy.

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a complex syndrome with a high incidence and considerable morbidity in critically ill patients. Renal replacement therapy (RRT) remains the mainstay of treatment for AKI. There are at present multiple disparities in uniform definition, diagnosis, and prevention of AKI and timing of initiation, mode, optimal dose, and discontinuation of RRT that need to be addressed. The Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine (ISCCM) AKI and RRT guidelines aim to address the clinical issues pertaining to AKI and practices to be followed for RRT, which will aid the clinicians in their day-to-day management of ICU patients with AKI. How to cite this article: Mishra RC, Sodhi K, Prakash KC, Tyagi N, Chanchalani G, Annigeri RA, et al. ISCCM Guidelines on Acute Kidney Injury and Renal Replacement Therapy. Indian J Crit Care Med 2022;26(S2):S13-S42.

Expert consensus statements for the management of COVID-19-related acute respiratory failure using a Delphi method.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused unprecedented pressure on healthcare system globally. Lack of high-quality evidence on the respiratory management of COVID-19-related acute respiratory failure (C-ARF) has resulted in wide variation in clinical practice. METHODS: Using a Delphi process, an international panel of 39 experts developed clinical practice statements on the respiratory management of C-ARF in areas where evidence is absent or limited. Agreement was defined as achieved when > 70% experts voted for a given option on the Likert scale statement or > 80% voted for a particular option in multiple-choice questions. Stability was assessed between the two concluding rounds for each statement, using the non-parametric Chi-square (χ2) test (p < 0·05 was considered as unstable). RESULTS: Agreement was achieved for 27 (73%) management strategies which were then used to develop expert clinical practice statements. Experts agreed that COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is clinically similar to other forms of ARDS. The Delphi process yielded strong suggestions for use of systemic corticosteroids for critical COVID-19; awake self-proning to improve oxygenation and high flow nasal oxygen to potentially reduce tracheal intubation; non-invasive ventilation for patients with mixed hypoxemic-hypercapnic respiratory failure; tracheal intubation for poor mentation, hemodynamic instability or severe hypoxemia; closed suction systems; lung protective ventilation; prone ventilation (for 16-24 h per day) to improve oxygenation; neuromuscular blocking agents for patient-ventilator dyssynchrony; avoiding delay in extubation for the risk of reintubation; and similar timing of tracheostomy as in non-COVID-19 patients. There was no agreement on positive end expiratory pressure titration or the choice of personal protective equipment. CONCLUSION: Using a Delphi method, an agreement among experts was reached for 27 statements from which 20 expert clinical practice statements were derived on the respiratory management of C-ARF, addressing important decisions for patient management in areas where evidence is either absent or limited. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered with Clinical trials.gov Identifier: NCT04534569.

Variation in therapeutic strategies for the management of severe COVID-19 in India: A nationwide cross-sectional survey.

AIM: During the pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), the physicians are using various off-label therapeutics to manage COVID-19. We undertook a cross-sectional survey to study the current variation in therapeutic strategies for managing severe COVID-19 in India. METHODS: From January 4 to January 18, 2021, an online cross-sectional survey was conducted among physicians involved in the management of severe COVID-19. The survey had three sections: 1. Antiviral agents, 2. Immunomodulators, and 3. Adjuvant therapies. RESULTS: 1055 respondents (from 24 states and five union territories), of which 64.2% were consultants, 54.3% working in private hospitals, and 39.1% were from critical care medicine completed the survey. Remdesivir (95.2%), antithrombotics (94.2%), corticosteroids (90.3%), vitamins (89.7%) and empirical antibiotics (85.6%) were the commonly used therapeutics. Ivermectin (33%), convalescent plasma (28.6%) and favipiravir (17.6%) were other antiviral agents used. Methylprednisolone (50.2%) and dexamethasone (44.1%) were preferred corticosteroids and at a dose equivalent of 8 mg of dexamethasone phosphate (70.2%). There was significant variation among physicians from different medical specialities in the use of favipiravir, corticosteroids, empirical antibiotics and vitamins. CONCLUSION: There is a considerable variation in the physicians' choice of therapeutic strategies for the management of severe COVID-19 in India, as compared with the available evidence.

Expert Consensus Statements on the Use of Corticosteroids in Non-severe COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: There is strong evidence for the use of corticosteroid in the management of severe coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). However, there is still uncertainty about the timing of corticosteroids. We undertook a modified Delphi study to develop expert consensus statements on the early identification of a subset of patients from non-severe COVID-19 who may benefit from using corticosteroids. METHODS: A modified Delphi was conducted with two anonymous surveys between April 30, 2021, and May 3, 2021. An expert panel of 35 experts was selected and invited to participate through e-mail. The consensus was defined as >70% votes in multiple-choice questions (MCQ) on Likert-scale type statements, while strong consensus as >90% votes in MCQ or >50% votes for "very important" on Likert-scale questions in the final round. RESULTS: Twenty experts completed two rounds of the survey. There was strong consensus for the increased work of breathing (95%), a positive six-minute walk test (90%), thorax computed tomography severity score of >14/25 (85%), new-onset organ dysfunction (using clinical or biochemical criteria) (80%), and C-reactive protein >5 times the upper limit of normal (70%) as the criteria for patients' selection. The experts recommended using oral or intravenous (IV) low-dose corticosteroids (the equivalent of 6 mg/day dexamethasone) for 5-10 days and monitoring of oxygen saturation, body temperature, clinical scoring system, blood sugar, and inflammatory markers for any "red-flag" signs. CONCLUSION: The experts recommended against indiscriminate use of corticosteroids in mild to moderate COVID-19 without the signs of clinical worsening. Oral or IV low-dose corticosteroids (the equivalent of 6 mg/day dexamethasone) for 5-10 days are recommended for patients with features of disease progression based on clinical, biochemical, or radiological criteria after 5 days from symptom onset under close monitoring. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: How to cite this article: Nasa P, Chaudhry D, Govil D, Daga MK, Jain R, Chhallani AA, et al. Expert Consensus Statements on the Use of Corticosteroids in Non-severe COVID-19. Indian J Crit Care Med 2021;25(11):1280-1285.

The Transport Medicine Society Consensus Guidelines for the Transport of Suspected or Confirmed COVID-19 Patients.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and has been declared as a pandemic. COVID-19 patients may require transport for diagnostic or therapeutic purposes intra- or interhospital or transport from an outside hospital to a healthcare facility. Transport of critically ill or infectious patients is always challenging and involves the integration of various tasks and manpower. The adverse events have been attributed to various factors such as a multidisciplinary team and lack of appropriate communication among team members, absence of equipment, or failure during transport, apart from physiological alteration inherent to the disease of the patient. The transport of COVID-19 patients carries an additional risk of not only the disease itself but also due to the risk of its transmission to the transport team. The human-to-human transmission of the virus can occur via respiratory droplets. So, the person involved in the transport of such patients shall be at risk and warrants appropriate steps for their safety. Appropriate planning by a well-trained transport team is an essence for the safe transport of the suspected or confirmed COVID-19 patients. The Transport Medicine Society guidelines present consensus guidelines for the safe transport of COVID-19 patients. DISCLAIMER: These consensus guidelines are applicable for the safe transport of suspected or confirmed COVID-19 adult patients. These recommendations should be used in conjunction with medical management guidelines and advisories related to COVID-19. These recommendations should be adapted to the local policies prevalent at the workplace and also per agreement among the hospitals for transport (agreement between referring and receiving facilities). With the emergence of new scientific evidence, these guidelines may require modification. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Munjal M, Ahmed SM, Garg R, Das S, Chatterjee N, Mittal K, et al. The Transport Medicine Society Consensus Guidelines for the Transport of Suspected or Confirmed COVID-19 Patients. Indian J Crit Care Med 2020;24(9):763-770.

Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine Position Statement for Central Venous Catheterization and Management 2020.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Short-term central venous catheterization (CVC) is one of the commonly used invasive interventions in ICU and other patient-care areas. Practice and management of CVC is not standardized, varies widely, and need appropriate guidance. Purpose of this document is to provide a comprehensive, evidence-based and up-to-date, one document source for practice and management of central venous catheterization. These recommendations are intended to be used by critical care physicians and allied professionals involved in care of patients with central venous lines. METHODS: This position statement for central venous catheterization is framed by expert committee members under the aegis of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine (ISCCM). Experts group exchanged and reviewed the relevant literature. During the final meeting of the experts held at the ISCCM Head Office, a consensus on all the topics was made and the recommendations for final document draft were prepared. The final document was reviewed and accepted by all expert committee members and after a process of peer-review this document is finally accepted as an official ISCCM position paper.Modified grade system was utilized to classify the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations. The draft document thus formulated was reviewed by all committee members; further comments and suggestions were incorporated after discussion, and a final document was prepared. RESULTS: This document makes recommendations about various aspects of resource preparation, infection control, prevention of mechanical complication and surveillance related to short-term central venous catheterization. This document also provides four appendices for ready reference and use at institutional level. CONCLUSION: In this document, committee is able to make 54 different recommendations for various aspects of care, out of which 40 are strong and 14 weak recommendations. Among all of them, 42 recommendations are backed by any level of evidence, however due to paucity of data on 12 clinical questions, a consensus was reached by working committee and practice recommendations given on these topics are based on vast clinical experience of the members of this committee, which makes a useful practice point. Committee recognizes the fact that in event of new emerging evidences this document will require update, and that shall be provided in due time. ABBREVIATIONS LIST: ABHR: Alcohol-based hand rub; AICD: Automated implantable cardioverter defibrillator; BSI: Blood stream infection; C/SS: CHG/silver sulfadiazine; Cath Lab: Catheterization laboratory (Cardiac Cath Lab); CDC: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; CFU: Colony forming unit; CHG: Chlorhexidine gluconate; CL: Central line; COMBUX: Comparison of Bedside Ultrasound with Chest X-ray (COMBUX study); CQI: Continuous quality improvement; CRBSI: Catheter-related blood stream infection; CUS: Chest ultrasonography; CVC: Central Venous Catheter; CXR: Chest X-ray; DTTP: Differential time to positivity; DVT: Deep venous thrombosis; ECG: Electrocardiography; ELVIS: Ethanol lock and risk of hemodialysis catheter infection in critically ill patients; ER: Emergency room; FDA: Food and Drug Administration; FV: Femoral vein; GWE: Guidewire exchange; HD catheter: Hemodialysis catheter; HTS: Hypertonic saline; ICP: Intracranial pressure; ICU: Intensive Care Unit; IDSA: Infectious Disease Society of America; IJV: Internal jugular vein; IPC: Indian penal code; IRR: Incidence rate ratio; ISCCM: Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine; IV: Intravenous; LCBI: Laboratory confirmed blood stream infection; M/R: Minocycline/rifampicin; MBI-LCBI: Mucosal barrier injury laboratory-confirmed bloodstream infection; MRSA: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus; NHS: National Health Service (UK); NHSN: National Healthcare Safety Network (USA); OT: Operation Theater; PICC: Peripherally-inserted central catheter; PIV: Peripheral intravenous line; PL: Peripheral line; PVI: Povidone-iodine; RA: Right atrium; RCT: Randomized controlled trial; RR: Relative risk; SCV/SV: Subclavian vein; ScVO2: Central venous oxygen saturation; Sn: Sensitivity; SOP: Standard operating procedure; SVC: Superior vena cava; TEE: Transesophageal echocardiography; UPP: Useful Practice Points; USG: Ultrasonography; WHO: World Health Organization. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Javeri Y, Jagathkar G, Dixit S, Chaudhary D, Zirpe KG, Mehta Y, et al. Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine Position Statement for Central Venous Catheterization and Management 2020. Indian J Crit Care Med 2020;24(Suppl 1):S6-S30.

Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine Experts Committee Consensus Statement on ICU Planning and Designing, 2020.

BACKGROUND: Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine (ISCCM) guidelines on Planning and Designing Intensive care (ICU) were first developed in 2001 and later updated in 2007. These guidelines were adopted in India, many developing Nations and major Institutions including NABH. Various international professional bodies in critical care have their own position papers and guidelines on planning and designing of ICUs; being the professional body of intensivists in India ISCCM therefore addresses the subject in contemporary context relevant to our clinical practice, its variability according to specialty and subspecialty, quality, resource limitation, size and location of the institution. Aim: To have a consensus document reflecting the philosophy of ISCCM to deliver safe & quality Critical Care in India, taking into consideration the requirement of regulatory agencies (national & international) and need of people at large, including promotion of training, education and skill upgradation. It also aiming to promote leadership and development and managerial skill among the critical care team. Material and Methods: Extensive review of literature including search of databases in English language, resources of regulatory bodies, guidelines and recommendations of international critical care societies. National Survey of ISCCM members and experts to understand their viewpoints on respective issues. Visiting of different types and levels of ICUs by team members to understand prevailing practices, aspiration and Challenges. Several face to face meetings of the expert committee members in big and small groups with extensive discussions, presentations, brain storming and development of initial consensus draft. Discussion on draft through video conferencing, phone calls, Emails circulations, one to one discussion Result: Based upon extensive review, survey and input of experts' ICUs were categorized in to three levels suitable in Indian setting. Level III ICUs further divided into sub category A and B. Recommendations were grouped in to structure, equipment and services of ICU with consideration of variation in level of ICU of different category of hospitals. Conclusion: This paper summarizes consensus statement of various aspect of ICU planning and design. Defined mandatory and desirable standards of all level of ICUs and made recommendations regarding structure and layout of ICUs. Definition of intensive care and intensivist, planning for strength of ICU and requirement of manpower were also described. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Rungta N, Zirpe KG, Dixit SB, Mehta Y, Chaudhry D, Govil D, et al. Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine Experts Committee Consensus Statement on ICU Planning and Designing, 2020. Indian J Crit Care Med 2020;24(Suppl 1):S43-S60.

Convergence of Minds: For Better Patient Outcome in Intensive Care Unit Infections.

BACKGROUND: There is emergence of resistance to the last-line antibiotics such as carbapenems in Intensive Care Units (ICUs), leaving little effective therapeutic options. Since there are no more newer antibiotics in the armamentarium in the near future, it has become imperative that we harness the interdisciplinary knowledge for the best clinical outcome of the patient. AIMS: The aim of the conference was to utilize the synergies between the clinical microbiologists and critical care specialists for better patient care and clinical outcome. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A combined continuing medical education program (CME) under the aegis of the Indian Association of Medical Microbiologists - Delhi Chapter and the Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine, Delhi and national capital region was organized to share their expertise on the various topics covering epidemiology, diagnosis, management, and prevention of hospital-acquired infections in ICUs. RESULTS: It was agreed that synergy between the clinical microbiologists and critical care medicine is required in understanding the scope of laboratory tests, investigative pathway testing, hospital epidemiology, and optimum use of antibiotics. A consensus on the use of rapid diagnostics such as point-of-care tests, matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization-time of flight mass spectrometry, and molecular tests for the early diagnosis of infectious disease was made. It was agreed that stewardship activities along with hospital infection control practices should be further strengthened for better utilization of the antibiotics. Through this CME, we identified the barriers and actionables for appropriate antimicrobial usage in Indian ICUs. CONCLUSIONS: A close coordination between clinical microbiology and critical care medicine opens up avenues to improve antimicrobial prescription practices.

Critical care practice in India: Results of the intensive care unit need assessment survey (ININ2018).

BACKGROUND: A diverse country like India may have variable intensive care units (ICUs) practices at state and city levels. AIM: To gain insight into clinical services and processes of care in ICUs in India, this would help plan for potential educational and quality improvement interventions. METHODS: The Indian ICU needs assessment research group of diverse-skilled individuals was formed. A pan- India survey "Indian National ICU Needs" assessment (ININ 2018-I) was designed on google forms and deployed from July 23rd-August 25th, 2018. The survey was sent to select distribution lists of ICU providers from all 29 states and 7 union territories (UTs). In addition to emails and phone calls, social medial applications-WhatsApp™, Facebook™ and LinkedIn™ were used to remind and motivate providers. By completing and submitting the survey, providers gave their consent for research purposes. This study was deemed eligible for category-2 Institutional Review Board exempt status. RESULTS: There were total 134 adult/adult-pediatrics ICU responses from 24 (83% out of 29) states, and two (28% out of 7) UTs in 61 cities. They had median (IQR) 16 (10-25) beds and most, were mixed medical-surgical, 111(83%), with 108(81%) being adult-only ICUs. Representative responders were young, median (IQR), 38 (32-44) years age and majority, n = 108 (81%) were males. The consultants were, n = 101 (75%). A total of 77 (57%) reported to have 24 h in-house intensivist. A total of 68 (51%) ICUs reported to have either 2:1 or 2≥:1 patient:nurse ratio. More than 80% of the ICUs were open, and mixed type. Protocols followed regularly by the ICUs included sepsis care, ventilator- associated pneumonia (83% each); nutrition (82%), deep vein thrombosis prophylaxis (87%), stress ulcer prophylaxis (88%) and glycemic control (92%). Digital infrastructure was found to be poor, with only 46 % of the ICUs reporting high-speed internet availability. CONCLUSION: In this large, national, semi-structured, need-assessment survey, the need for improved manpower including; in-house intensivists, and decreasing patient-to-nurse ratios was evident. Sepsis was the most common diagnosis and quality and research initiatives to decrease sepsis mortality and ICU length of stay could be prioritized. Additionally, subsequent surveys can focus on digital infrastructure for standardized care and efficient resource utilization and enhancing compliance with existing protocols.

Continuous venovenous hemodiafiltration along with charcoal hemoperfusion for the management of life-threatening lercanidipine and amlodipine overdose.

Overdose with calcium channel blockers is uncommon, but is associated with high mortality. The management includes fluid resuscitation, calcium gluconate, glucagon, vasopressors, and high-dose insulin-euglycemia therapy. We describe a rare case of massive overdose of lercanidipine with shock, refractory to conventional therapies and multi-organ failure. Charcoal hemoperfusion with continuous venovenous hemodiafiltration was then used successfully and the patient showed remarkable recovery.

Evaluation of rapid response team implementation in medical emergencies: A gallant evidence based medicine initiative in developing countries for serious adverse events.

BACKGROUND: Rapid response team (RRT) has been implemented in developed countries with the aim of early recognition and response to critical care triggers for the better patient outcome. However, the data concerning their efficacy is hardly available until date from Indian subcontinent. AIMS: To evaluate the impact of RRT implementation on patient outcome during medical emergencies. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: Retrospective observational study of RRT records of in-bed patients of super specialty academic teaching hospital. MATERIALS AND METHODS: RRT record forms during the first half of the year from January 2012 to June 2012 were included for all inpatients and out-patients irrespective of their age, gender and diseases profile after their inclusion in the system. Outcomes such as patient stayed in the room, patient transfer to intensive care unit (ICU), patient discharge and generation of code blue event, mortality and length of stay in hospital/ICU were measured. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Descriptive analysis was performed with the help of statistical software STATA 9.0 and R 2.13.2 (StataCorp LP, Lakeway Drive College Station, Texas, USA). RESULTS: Analysis of 41 RRT calls showed decreased code blue calls by 2.44% and decrease in mortality by 4.88%. Average length of stay in ICU and hospital post RRT assistance for patients was 2.55 and 6.95 days respectively. Conversely percentage of patients requiring a higher level of care was more (75.61%) than those who stayed in their rooms/wards (24.39%). CONCLUSION: Implementation of RRT in this hospital was associated with reduced code blue events and its attendant mortality outside the ICU settings. However, more number of patient requiring higher levels of care delineates the need for a larger evidence based medicine study.

Emergency percutaneous tracheostomy in two cancer patients with difficult airway: An alternative to cricothyroidotomy?

Inability to intubate and/or ventilate either due to distorted neck anatomy or restricted mouth opening is uncommon but potentially hazardous clinical scenario in head and neck cancer patients. Emergency cricothyroidotomy in such patients may provide a means of oxygenating the patient, but in practice has limitations and does not establish a definitive airway. We report 2 cases who had distorted face and neck anatomy in which percutaneous tracheostomy was done as an emergency life-saving procedure when other measures to obtain a definitive airway failed.

Clinical profile, intensive care unit course, and outcome of patients admitted in intensive care unit with dengue.

PURPOSE: The purpose of the study was to assess the clinical profile and course of dengue patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) and to identify factors related to poor outcome. METHODS: All patients with dengue admitted to ICU over 2.5 years were included prospectively. Severity of illness was assessed by the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II score, and organ failure was determined by the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score. Primary outcome measure was 28-day mortality. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify factors predicting mortality. RESULTS: Data from 198 patients were analyzed. Mean age was 39.56 ± 17.1 years, and 61.1% were male. The commonest complaints were fever (96%) and rash (37.9%). Mean admission APACHE II and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores were 7.52 ± 7.8 and 4.52 ± 3.4, respectively. The commonest organ failure was coagulation (43.4%) followed by respiratory failure (13.1%). Vasopressors were required by 11.6%; and dialysis and mechanical ventilation were required by 7.6% and 9.1%, respectively. Mortality was 12 (6.1%); and on multivariate analysis, APACHE II score (odds ratio, 1.781; 95% confidence interval, 0.967-3.281; P = .048) could independently predict mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with dengue fever may require ICU admission for organ failure. Outcome is good if appropriate aggressive care and organ support are instituted. Admission APACHE II score may predict patients at higher risk of death.

Candida sake candidaemia in non-neutropenic critically ill patients: a case series.

Candida sake infections are rare, but have been shown to cause severe infections including fungal endocarditis, peritonitis and bloodstream infection. As the reported incidence of C. sake candidaemia is very low, there is a dearth of data regarding the associated risk factors, antifungal agent-susceptibility patterns, optimal treatment policies, clinical course and outcomes of patients with such infections. We report a series of seven non-neutropenic intensive care unit patients with C. sake candidaemia. Most of the patients were men (6/7), were over 65 years of age (5/7) and had a history of recent hospitalisation (4/7) and comorbidities (4/7). However, all seven patients had a previous history of antibiotic uptake for more than 5 days and had a central venous catheter in situ at the time of taking specimens for culture. In four patients, infection was azole-resistant. Four patients required vasopressor support, three required mechanical ventilation and two required renal replacement therapy. Three of the seven patients died. This case series emphasises the importance of performing species identification and antifungal susceptibility testing in ICU patients with candidaemia, especially those with advanced age, underlying chronic diseases, indwelling vascular catheters, or a history of previous antibiotics or recent hospitalisations, as these patients may be at an increased risk of developing rare Candida infections like C. sake. Moreover, these rare Candida species may be more frequently resistant to azole antifungal agents, and may be associated with significant mortality.

Profile and outcome of patients with acute toxicity admitted in intensive care unit: Experiences from a major corporate hospital in urban India.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: There is scarcity of data from the Indian subcontinent regarding the profile and outcome of patients presenting with acute poisoning admitted to intensive care units (ICU). We undertook this retrospective analysis to assess the course and outcome of such patients admitted in an ICU of a tertiary care private hospital. METHODS: We analyzed data from 138 patients admitted to ICU with acute poisoning between July 2006 and March 2009. Data regarding type of poisoning, time of presentation, reason for ICU admission, ICU course and outcome were obtained. RESULTS: Seventy (50.7%) patients were males and majority (47.8%) of admissions were from age group 21 to 30 years. The most common agents were benzodiazepines, 41/138 (29.7%), followed by alcohol, 34/138 (24.63%) and opioids, 10/138 (7.2%). Thirty-two (23%) consumed two or more agents. Commonest mode of toxicity was suicidal (78.3%) and the route of exposure was mainly oral (97.8%). The highest incidence of toxicity was due to drugs (46.3%) followed by household agents (13%). Organ failure was present in 67 patients (48.5%). During their ICU course, dialysis was required in four, inotropic support in 14 and ventilator support in 13 patients. ICU mortality was 3/138 (2.8%). All deaths were due to aluminium phosphide poisoning. CONCLUSIONS: The present data give an insight into epidemiology of poisoning and represents a trend in urban India. The spectrum differs as we cater to urban middle and upper class. There is an increasing variety and complexity of toxins, with substance abuse attributing to significant number of cases.