RESUMEN
Objectives: This multicenter cohort study describes Aotearoa New Zealand children hospitalized during the country's first wave of sustained SARS-CoV-2 transmission, Omicron variant. Methods: Children younger than 16 years, hospitalized for >6 hours with COVID-19 across New Zealand from January to May 2022 were included. Admissions for all Maori and Pacific and every second non-Maori non-Pacific children were selected to support equal explanatory power for ethnic grouping. Attribution of hospital admission, demography, clinical presentation, comorbidity, treatment, and outcome data were collected. Results: Of 444 hospitalizations of children positive for COVID-19, 292 (65.5%) from 290 children were considered admissions attributable to COVID-19. Of these admissions, 126 (43.4%) were aged under 1; 118 (40.7%), 99 (34.1%), and 87 (30.0%) were children of Maori, Pacific, and non-Maori non-Pacific ethnicity, respectively. Underlying respiratory disease was the most common comorbidity, present in 22 children (7.6%); 16 children (5.5%) were immunosuppressed. Median length of stay was 1 day (interquartile range 0.0-2.0). Four children received antiviral, 69 (24%) antibacterial, and 24 (8%) supplemental oxygen. Although eight children required intensive care, there were no deaths. Conclusions: Children hospitalized during the first significant wave of SARS-CoV-2 infection in New Zealand presented with a multi-system viral illness and rarely with severe disease.
RESUMEN
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.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: New Zealand's (NZ) complete absence of community transmission of influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) after May 2020, likely due to COVID-19 elimination measures, provided a rare opportunity to assess the impact of border restrictions on common respiratory viral infections over the ensuing 2 years. METHODS: We collected the data from multiple surveillance systems, including hospital-based severe acute respiratory infection surveillance, SHIVERS-II, -III and -IV community cohorts for acute respiratory infection (ARI) surveillance, HealthStat sentinel general practice (GP) based influenza-like illness surveillance and SHIVERS-V sentinel GP-based ARI surveillance, SHIVERS-V traveller ARI surveillance and laboratory-based surveillance. We described the data on influenza, RSV and other respiratory viral infections in NZ before, during and after various stages of the COVID related border restrictions. RESULTS: We observed that border closure to most people, and mandatory government-managed isolation and quarantine on arrival for those allowed to enter, appeared to be effective in keeping influenza and RSV infections out of the NZ community. Border restrictions did not affect community transmission of other respiratory viruses such as rhinovirus and parainfluenza virus type-1. Partial border relaxations through quarantine-free travel with Australia and other countries were quickly followed by importation of RSV in 2021 and influenza in 2022. CONCLUSION: Our findings inform future pandemic preparedness and strategies to model and manage the impact of influenza and other respiratory viral threats.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Gripe Humana , Infecciones por Virus Sincitial Respiratorio , Virus Sincitial Respiratorio Humano , Infecciones del Sistema Respiratorio , Virosis , Humanos , Gripe Humana/epidemiología , Gripe Humana/prevención & control , Nueva Zelanda/epidemiología , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , Infecciones del Sistema Respiratorio/epidemiología , Infecciones del Sistema Respiratorio/prevención & control , Infecciones por Virus Sincitial Respiratorio/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: We sought to assess whether genetic associations with metabolite concentrations in septic shock patients could be used to identify pathways of potential importance for understanding sepsis pathophysiology. DESIGN: Retrospective multicenter cohort studies of septic shock patients. SETTING: All participants who were admitted to 27 participating hospital sites in three countries (Australia, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom) were eligible for inclusion. PATIENTS: Adult, critically ill, mechanically ventilated patients with septic shock (n = 230) who were a subset of the Adjunctive Corticosteroid Treatment in Critically Ill Patients with Septic Shock trial (ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT01448109). INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A genome-wide association study was conducted for a range of serum metabolite levels for participants. Genome-wide significant associations (p ≤ 5 × 10-8) were found for the two major ketone bodies (3-hydroxybutyrate [rs2456680] and acetoacetate [rs2213037] and creatinine (rs6851961). One of these single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) (rs2213037) was located in the alcohol dehydrogenase cluster of genes, which code for enzymes related to the metabolism of acetoacetate and, therefore, presents a plausible association for this metabolite. None of the three SNPs showed strong associations with risk of sepsis, 28- or 90-day mortality, or Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation score (a measure of sepsis severity). CONCLUSIONS: We suggest that the genetic associations with metabolites may reflect a starvation response rather than processes involved in sepsis pathophysiology. However, our results require further investigation and replication in both healthy and diseased cohorts including those of different ancestry.
RESUMEN
Importance: The efficacy of vitamin C for hospitalized patients with COVID-19 is uncertain. Objective: To determine whether vitamin C improves outcomes for patients with COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: Two prospectively harmonized randomized clinical trials enrolled critically ill patients receiving organ support in intensive care units (90 sites) and patients who were not critically ill (40 sites) between July 23, 2020, and July 15, 2022, on 4 continents. Interventions: Patients were randomized to receive vitamin C administered intravenously or control (placebo or no vitamin C) every 6 hours for 96 hours (maximum of 16 doses). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was a composite of organ support-free days defined as days alive and free of respiratory and cardiovascular organ support in the intensive care unit up to day 21 and survival to hospital discharge. Values ranged from -1 organ support-free days for patients experiencing in-hospital death to 22 organ support-free days for those who survived without needing organ support. The primary analysis used a bayesian cumulative logistic model. An odds ratio (OR) greater than 1 represented efficacy (improved survival, more organ support-free days, or both), an OR less than 1 represented harm, and an OR less than 1.2 represented futility. Results: Enrollment was terminated after statistical triggers for harm and futility were met. The trials had primary outcome data for 1568 critically ill patients (1037 in the vitamin C group and 531 in the control group; median age, 60 years [IQR, 50-70 years]; 35.9% were female) and 1022 patients who were not critically ill (456 in the vitamin C group and 566 in the control group; median age, 62 years [IQR, 51-72 years]; 39.6% were female). Among critically ill patients, the median number of organ support-free days was 7 (IQR, -1 to 17 days) for the vitamin C group vs 10 (IQR, -1 to 17 days) for the control group (adjusted proportional OR, 0.88 [95% credible interval {CrI}, 0.73 to 1.06]) and the posterior probabilities were 8.6% (efficacy), 91.4% (harm), and 99.9% (futility). Among patients who were not critically ill, the median number of organ support-free days was 22 (IQR, 18 to 22 days) for the vitamin C group vs 22 (IQR, 21 to 22 days) for the control group (adjusted proportional OR, 0.80 [95% CrI, 0.60 to 1.01]) and the posterior probabilities were 2.9% (efficacy), 97.1% (harm), and greater than 99.9% (futility). Among critically ill patients, survival to hospital discharge was 61.9% (642/1037) for the vitamin C group vs 64.6% (343/531) for the control group (adjusted OR, 0.92 [95% CrI, 0.73 to 1.17]) and the posterior probability was 24.0% for efficacy. Among patients who were not critically ill, survival to hospital discharge was 85.1% (388/456) for the vitamin C group vs 86.6% (490/566) for the control group (adjusted OR, 0.86 [95% CrI, 0.61 to 1.17]) and the posterior probability was 17.8% for efficacy. Conclusions and Relevance: In hospitalized patients with COVID-19, vitamin C had low probability of improving the primary composite outcome of organ support-free days and hospital survival. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT04401150 (LOVIT-COVID) and NCT02735707 (REMAP-CAP).
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Sepsis , Humanos , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Masculino , Ácido Ascórbico/uso terapéutico , Enfermedad Crítica/terapia , Enfermedad Crítica/mortalidad , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , Teorema de Bayes , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Vitaminas/uso terapéutico , Sepsis/tratamiento farmacológicoRESUMEN
PURPOSE: Recombinant erythropoietin (EPO) administered for traumatic brain injury (TBI) may increase short-term survival, but the long-term effect is unknown. METHODS: We conducted a pre-planned long-term follow-up of patients in the multicentre erythropoietin in TBI trial (2010-2015). We invited survivors to follow-up and evaluated survival and functional outcome with the Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended (GOSE) (categories 5-8 = good outcome), and secondly, with good outcome determined relative to baseline function (sliding scale). We used survival analysis to assess time to death and absolute risk differences (ARD) to assess favorable outcomes. We categorized TBI severity with the International Mission for Prognosis and Analysis of Clinical Trials in TBI model. Heterogeneity of treatment effects were assessed with interaction p-values based on the following a priori defined subgroups, the severity of TBI, and the presence of an intracranial mass lesion and multi-trauma in addition to TBI. RESULTS: Of 603 patients in the original trial, 487 patients had survival data; 356 were included in the follow-up at a median of 6 years from injury. There was no difference between treatment groups for patient survival [EPO vs placebo hazard ratio (HR) (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.73 (0.47-1.14) p = 0.17]. Good outcome rates were 110/175 (63%) in the EPO group vs 100/181 (55%) in the placebo group (ARD 8%, 95% CI [Formula: see text] 3 to 18%, p = 0.14). When good outcome was determined relative to baseline risk, the EPO groups had better GOSE (sliding scale ARD 12%, 95% CI 2-22%, p = 0.02). When considering long-term patient survival, there was no evidence for heterogeneity of treatment effect (HTE) according to severity of TBI (p = 0.85), presence of an intracranial mass lesion (p = 0.48), or whether the patient had multi-trauma in addition to TBI (p = 0.08). Similarly, no evidence of treatment heterogeneity was seen for the effect of EPO on functional outcome. CONCLUSION: EPO neither decreased overall long-term mortality nor improved functional outcome in moderate or severe TBI patients treated in the intensive care unit (ICU). The limited sample size makes it difficult to make final conclusions about the use of EPO in TBI.
Asunto(s)
Lesiones Traumáticas del Encéfalo , Eritropoyetina , Traumatismo Múltiple , Humanos , Lesiones Traumáticas del Encéfalo/tratamiento farmacológico , Eritropoyetina/uso terapéutico , Resultado del Tratamiento , Análisis de SupervivenciaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Delayed graft function (DGF) is a major adverse complication of deceased donor kidney transplantation. Intravenous fluids are routinely given to patients receiving a transplant to maintain intravascular volume and optimise graft function. Saline (0·9% sodium chloride) is widely used but might increase the risk of DGF due to its high chloride content. We aimed to test our hypothesis that using a balanced low-chloride crystalloid solution (Plasma-Lyte 148) instead of saline would reduce the incidence of DGF. METHODS: BEST-Fluids was a pragmatic, registry-embedded, multicentre, double-blind, randomised, controlled trial at 16 hospitals in Australia and New Zealand. Adults and children of any age receiving a deceased donor kidney transplant were eligible; those receiving a multi-organ transplant or weighing less than 20 kg were excluded. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) using an adaptive minimisation algorithm to intravenous balanced crystalloid solution (Plasma-Lyte 148) or saline during surgery and up until 48 h after transplantation. Trial fluids were supplied in identical bags and clinicians determined the fluid volume, rate, and time of discontinuation. The primary outcome was DGF, defined as receiving dialysis within 7 days after transplantation. All participants who consented and received a transplant were included in the intention-to-treat analysis of the primary outcome. Safety was analysed in all randomly assigned eligible participants who commenced surgery and received trial fluids, whether or not they received a transplant. This study is registered with Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, (ACTRN12617000358347), and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03829488). FINDINGS: Between Jan 26, 2018, and Aug 10, 2020, 808 participants were randomly assigned to balanced crystalloid (n=404) or saline (n=404) and received a transplant (512 [63%] were male and 296 [37%] were female). One participant in the saline group withdrew before 7 days and was excluded, leaving 404 participants in the balanced crystalloid group and 403 in the saline group that were included in the primary analysis. DGF occurred in 121 (30%) of 404 participants in the balanced crystalloid group versus 160 (40%) of 403 in the saline group (adjusted relative risk 0·74 [95% CI 0·66 to 0·84; p<0·0001]; adjusted risk difference 10·1% [95% CI 3·5 to 16·6]). In the safety analysis, numbers of investigator-reported serious adverse events were similar in both groups, being reported in three (<1%) of 406 participants in the balanced crystalloid group versus five (1%) of 409 participants in the saline group (adjusted risk difference -0·5%, 95% CI -1·8 to 0·9; p=0·48). INTERPRETATION: Among patients receiving a deceased donor kidney transplant, intravenous fluid therapy with balanced crystalloid solution reduced the incidence of DGF compared with saline. Balanced crystalloid solution should be the standard-of-care intravenous fluid used in deceased donor kidney transplantation. FUNDING: Medical Research Future Fund and National Health and Medical Research Council (Australia), Health Research Council (New Zealand), Royal Australasian College of Physicians, and Baxter.
Asunto(s)
Trasplante de Riñón , Adulto , Niño , Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Cloruros , Australia/epidemiología , Soluciones Cristaloides , Método Doble CiegoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Whether prehospital administration of tranexamic acid increases the likelihood of survival with a favorable functional outcome among patients with major trauma and suspected trauma-induced coagulopathy who are being treated in advanced trauma systems is uncertain. METHODS: We randomly assigned adults with major trauma who were at risk for trauma-induced coagulopathy to receive tranexamic acid (administered intravenously as a bolus dose of 1 g before hospital admission, followed by a 1-g infusion over a period of 8 hours after arrival at the hospital) or matched placebo. The primary outcome was survival with a favorable functional outcome at 6 months after injury, as assessed with the use of the Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended (GOS-E). Levels on the GOS-E range from 1 (death) to 8 ("upper good recovery" [no injury-related problems]). We defined survival with a favorable functional outcome as a GOS-E level of 5 ("lower moderate disability") or higher. Secondary outcomes included death from any cause within 28 days and within 6 months after injury. RESULTS: A total of 1310 patients were recruited by 15 emergency medical services in Australia, New Zealand, and Germany. Of these patients, 661 were assigned to receive tranexamic acid, and 646 were assigned to receive placebo; the trial-group assignment was unknown for 3 patients. Survival with a favorable functional outcome at 6 months occurred in 307 of 572 patients (53.7%) in the tranexamic acid group and in 299 of 559 (53.5%) in the placebo group (risk ratio, 1.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.90 to 1.12; P = 0.95). At 28 days after injury, 113 of 653 patients (17.3%) in the tranexamic acid group and 139 of 637 (21.8%) in the placebo group had died (risk ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.63 to 0.99). By 6 months, 123 of 648 patients (19.0%) in the tranexamic acid group and 144 of 629 (22.9%) in the placebo group had died (risk ratio, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.67 to 1.03). The number of serious adverse events, including vascular occlusive events, did not differ meaningfully between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among adults with major trauma and suspected trauma-induced coagulopathy who were being treated in advanced trauma systems, prehospital administration of tranexamic acid followed by an infusion over 8 hours did not result in a greater number of patients surviving with a favorable functional outcome at 6 months than placebo. (Funded by the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council and others; PATCH-Trauma ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02187120.).
Asunto(s)
Antifibrinolíticos , Trastornos de la Coagulación Sanguínea , Servicios Médicos de Urgencia , Ácido Tranexámico , Heridas y Lesiones , Adulto , Humanos , Antifibrinolíticos/efectos adversos , Antifibrinolíticos/uso terapéutico , Australia , Ácido Tranexámico/efectos adversos , Ácido Tranexámico/uso terapéutico , Enfermedades Vasculares/etiología , Heridas y Lesiones/complicaciones , Trastornos de la Coagulación Sanguínea/etiologíaRESUMEN
Importance: Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of therapeutic-dose heparin in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 produced conflicting results, possibly due to heterogeneity of treatment effect (HTE) across individuals. Better understanding of HTE could facilitate individualized clinical decision-making. Objective: To evaluate HTE of therapeutic-dose heparin for patients hospitalized for COVID-19 and to compare approaches to assessing HTE. Design, Setting, and Participants: Exploratory analysis of a multiplatform adaptive RCT of therapeutic-dose heparin vs usual care pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis in 3320 patients hospitalized for COVID-19 enrolled in North America, South America, Europe, Asia, and Australia between April 2020 and January 2021. Heterogeneity of treatment effect was assessed 3 ways: using (1) conventional subgroup analyses of baseline characteristics, (2) a multivariable outcome prediction model (risk-based approach), and (3) a multivariable causal forest model (effect-based approach). Analyses primarily used bayesian statistics, consistent with the original trial. Exposures: Participants were randomized to therapeutic-dose heparin or usual care pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis. Main Outcomes and Measures: Organ support-free days, assigning a value of -1 to those who died in the hospital and the number of days free of cardiovascular or respiratory organ support up to day 21 for those who survived to hospital discharge; and hospital survival. Results: Baseline demographic characteristics were similar between patients randomized to therapeutic-dose heparin or usual care (median age, 60 years; 38% female; 32% known non-White race; 45% Hispanic). In the overall multiplatform RCT population, therapeutic-dose heparin was not associated with an increase in organ support-free days (median value for the posterior distribution of the OR, 1.05; 95% credible interval, 0.91-1.22). In conventional subgroup analyses, the effect of therapeutic-dose heparin on organ support-free days differed between patients requiring organ support at baseline or not (median OR, 0.85 vs 1.30; posterior probability of difference in OR, 99.8%), between females and males (median OR, 0.87 vs 1.16; posterior probability of difference in OR, 96.4%), and between patients with lower body mass index (BMI <30) vs higher BMI groups (BMI ≥30; posterior probability of difference in ORs >90% for all comparisons). In risk-based analysis, patients at lowest risk of poor outcome had the highest propensity for benefit from heparin (lowest risk decile: posterior probability of OR >1, 92%) while those at highest risk were most likely to be harmed (highest risk decile: posterior probability of OR <1, 87%). In effect-based analysis, a subset of patients identified at high risk of harm (P = .05 for difference in treatment effect) tended to have high BMI and were more likely to require organ support at baseline. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients hospitalized for COVID-19, the effect of therapeutic-dose heparin was heterogeneous. In all 3 approaches to assessing HTE, heparin was more likely to be beneficial in those who were less severely ill at presentation or had lower BMI and more likely to be harmful in sicker patients and those with higher BMI. The findings illustrate the importance of considering HTE in the design and analysis of RCTs. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT02735707, NCT04505774, NCT04359277, NCT04372589.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Tromboembolia Venosa , Masculino , Humanos , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Heparina/efectos adversos , Anticoagulantes/efectos adversos , Teorema de Bayes , Tromboembolia Venosa/prevención & control , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como AsuntoRESUMEN
Rationale: The SPICE III (Sedation Practice in Intensive Care Evaluation) trial reported significant heterogeneity in mortality with dexmedetomidine treatment. Supplemental propofol was commonly used to achieve desirable sedation. Objectives: To quantify the association of different infusion rates of dexmedetomidine and propofol, given in combination, with mortality and to determine if this is modified by age. Methods: We included 1,177 patients randomized in SPICE III to receive dexmedetomidine and given supplemental propofol, stratified by age (>65 or ⩽65 yr). We used double stratification analysis to produce quartiles of steady infusion rates of dexmedetomidine while escalating propofol dose and vice versa. We used Cox proportional hazard and multivariable regression adjusted for relevant clinical variable to evaluate the association of sedative dose with 90-day mortality. Measurements and Main Results: Younger patients (598 of 1,177 [50.8%]) received significantly higher doses of both sedatives compared with older patients to achieve comparable sedation depth. On double stratification analysis, escalating infusion rates of propofol to 1.27 mg/kg/h at a steady dexmedetomidine infusion rate (0.54 µg/kg/h) was associated with reduced adjusted mortality in younger but not older patients. This was consistent with multivariable regression modeling (hazard ratio, 0.59; 95% confidence interval, 0.43-0.78; P < 0.0001) adjusted for baseline risk and interaction with dexmedetomidine dose. In contrast, among younger patients, using multivariable regression, escalating dexmedetomidine infusion rate was associated with increased adjusted mortality (hazard ratio, 1.30; 95% confidence interval, 1.03-1.65; P = 0.029). Conclusions: In patients ⩽65 years of age sedated with dexmedetomidine and propofol combination, preferentially increasing the dose of propofol was associated with decreased adjusted 90-day mortality. Conversely, increasing dexmedetomidine may be associated with increased mortality. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01728558).
Asunto(s)
Dexmedetomidina , Propofol , Humanos , Propofol/efectos adversos , Dexmedetomidina/efectos adversos , Enfermedad Crítica/terapia , Respiración Artificial , Hipnóticos y Sedantes/efectos adversos , Estudios de CohortesRESUMEN
Large randomised trials provide the most reliable evidence of effectiveness of new treatments in clinical practice. However, the time and resources required to complete such trials can be daunting. An overarching clinical trial platform focused on a single condition or type of surgery, aiming to compare several treatments, with an option to stop any or add in new treatment options, can provide greater efficiency. This has the potential to accelerate knowledge acquisition and identify effective, ineffective, or harmful treatments faster. The master protocol of the platform defines the study population(s) and standardised procedures. Ineffective or harmful treatments can be discarded or study drug dose modified during the life cycle of the trial. Other adaptive elements that can be modified include eligibility criteria, required sample size for any comparison(s), randomisation assignment ratio, and the addition of other promising treatment options. There are excellent opportunities for anaesthetists to establish platform trials in perioperative medicine. Platform trials are highly efficient, with the potential to provide quicker answers to important clinical questions that lead to improved patient care.
Asunto(s)
Anestesia , Anestesiología , Medicina Perioperatoria , Humanos , Proyectos de InvestigaciónRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Nafamostat mesylate is a potent in vitro antiviral agent that inhibits the host transmembrane protease serine 2 enzyme used by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 for cell entry. METHODS: This open-label, pragmatic, randomized clinical trial in Australia, New Zealand, and Nepal included noncritically ill hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). Participants were randomly assigned to usual care or usual care plus nafamostat. The primary end point was death (any cause) or receipt of new invasive or noninvasive ventilation or vasopressor support within 28 days after randomization. Analysis was with a Bayesian logistic model in which an adjusted odds ratio <1.0 indicates improved outcomes with nafamostat. Enrollment was closed due to falling numbers of eligible patients. RESULTS: We screened 647 patients in 21 hospitals (15 in Australia, 4 in New Zealand, and 2 in Nepal) and enrolled 160 participants from May 2021 to August 2022. In the intention-to-treat population, the primary end point occurred in 8 (11%) of 73 patients with usual care and 4 (5%) of 82 with nafamostat. The median adjusted odds ratio for the primary end point for nafamostat was 0.40 (95% credible interval, 0.12 to 1.34) with a posterior probability of effectiveness (adjusted odds ratio <1.0) of 93%. For usual care compared with nafamostat, hyperkalemia occurred in 1 (1%) of 67 and 7 (9%) of 78 participants, respectively, and clinically relevant bleeding occurred in 1 (1%) of 73 and 7 (8%) of 82 participants. CONCLUSIONS: Among hospitalized patients with Covid-19, there was a 93% posterior probability that nafamostat reduced the odds of death or organ support. Prespecified stopping criteria were not met, precluding definitive conclusions. Hyperkalemia and bleeding were more common with nafamostat. (Funded by ASCOT and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04483960.)
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Humanos , SARS-CoV-2 , Guanidinas/farmacología , BenzamidinasRESUMEN
Delayed graft function (DGF) is a major complication of deceased donor kidney transplantation. Saline (0.9% sodium chloride) is a commonly used intravenous fluid in transplantation but may increase the risk of DGF because of its high chloride content. Better Evidence for Selecting Transplant Fluids (BEST-Fluids), a pragmatic, registry-based, double-blind, randomized trial, sought to determine whether using a balanced low-chloride crystalloid solution (Plasma-Lyte 148) instead of saline would reduce DGF. We sought to evaluate the generalizability of the trial cohort by reporting the baseline characteristics and representativeness of the trial participants in detail. Methods: We compared the characteristics of BEST-Fluids participants with those of a contemporary cohort of deceased donor kidney transplant recipients in Australia and New Zealand using data from the Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry. To explore potential international differences, we compared trial participants with a cohort of transplant recipients in the United States using data from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients. Results: During the trial recruitment period, 2373 deceased donor kidney transplants were performed in Australia and New Zealand; 2178 were eligible' and 808 were enrolled in BEST-Fluids. Overall, trial participants and nonparticipants were similar at baseline. Trial participants had more coronary artery disease (standardized difference [d] = 0.09; P = 0.03), longer dialysis duration (d = 0.18, P < 0.001), and fewer hypertensive (d = -0.11, P = 0.03) and circulatory death (d = -0.14, P < 0.01) donors than nonparticipants. Most key characteristics were similar between trial participants and US recipients, with moderate differences (|d| ≥ 0.2; all P < 0.001) in kidney failure cause, diabetes, dialysis duration, ischemic time, and several donor risk predictors, likely reflecting underlying population differences. Conclusions: BEST-Fluids participants had more comorbidities and received slightly fewer high-risk deceased donor kidneys but were otherwise representative of Australian and New Zealand transplant recipients and were generally similar to US recipients. The trial results should be broadly applicable to deceased donor kidney transplantation practice worldwide.
RESUMEN
PURPOSE: To compare the effect of conservative vs. liberal oxygen therapy in mechanically ventilated adults in the intensive care unit (ICU) with non-hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy (HIE) acute brain pathologies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Post-hoc analysis of data from 217 patients with non-HIE acute brain pathologies included in the ICU Randomized Trial Comparing Two Approaches to OXygen therapy (ICU-ROX). RESULTS: Patients allocated to conservative oxygen spent less time with oxygen saturation ≥ 97% (50.5 [interquartile range (IQR), 18.5-119] vs. 82 h [IQR, 38-164], absolute difference, -31.5 h; 95%CI, -59.6 to -3.4). At 180 days, 38 of 110 conservative oxygen patients (34.5%) and 28 of 104 liberal oxygen patients (26.9%) had died (absolute difference, 7.6 percentage points; 95%CI, -4.7 to 19.9 percentage points; P = 0.23; interaction P = 0.02 for non-HIE acute brain pathologies vs. HIE; interaction P = 0.53 for non-HIE acute brain pathologies vs. non-neurological conditions). CONCLUSIONS: In this post-hoc analysis, patients admitted to the ICU with non-HIE acute brain pathologies treated with conservative oxygen therapy did not have significantly lower mortality than those treated with liberal oxygen. A trial with adequate statistical power is needed to determine whether our day 180 mortality point estimate of treatment effect favoring liberal oxygen therapy indicates a true effect.
Asunto(s)
Terapia por Inhalación de Oxígeno , Respiración Artificial , Adulto , Encéfalo , Humanos , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , OxígenoRESUMEN
Rationale: Blood glucose concentrations affect outcomes in critically ill patients, but the optimal target blood glucose range in those with type 2 diabetes is unknown. Objectives: To evaluate the effects of a "liberal" approach to targeted blood glucose range during ICU admission. Methods: This mutlicenter, parallel-group, open-label randomized clinical trial included 419 adult patients with type 2 diabetes expected to be in the ICU on at least three consecutive days. In the intervention group intravenous insulin was commenced at a blood glucose >252 mg/dl and titrated to a target range of 180-252 mg/dl. In the comparator group insulin was commenced at a blood glucose >180 mg/dl and titrated to a target range of 108-180 mg/dl. The primary outcome was incident hypoglycemia (<72 mg/dl). Secondary outcomes included glucose metrics and clinical outcomes. Measurements and Main Results: By Day 28, at least one episode of hypoglycemia occurred in 10 of 210 (5%) patients assigned the intervention and 38 of 209 (18%) patients assigned the comparator (incident rate ratio, 0.21 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.09 to 0.49]; P < 0.001). Those assigned the intervention had greater blood glucose concentrations (daily mean, minimum, maximum), less glucose variability, and less relative hypoglycemia (P < 0.001 for all comparisons). By Day 90, 62 of 210 (29.5%) in the intervention and 52 of 209 (24.9%) in the comparator group had died (absolute difference, 4.6 percentage points [95% CI, -3.9% to 13.2%]; P = 0.29). Conclusions: A liberal approach to blood glucose targets reduced incident hypoglycemia but did not improve patient-centered outcomes. Clinical trial registered with Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN 12616001135404).
Asunto(s)
Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2 , Hipoglucemia , Adulto , Australia , Glucemia , Enfermedad Crítica/terapia , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/complicaciones , Humanos , Hipoglucemia/complicaciones , Hipoglucemia/tratamiento farmacológico , Hipoglucemia/prevención & control , Hipoglucemiantes/uso terapéutico , Insulina/uso terapéuticoRESUMEN
Gastrointestinal dysfunction/failure (GDF) is a common cause of concern in critically ill patients. Although the gut plays an important role in the genesis of organ failure, its exclusion from organ severity scoring systems has made it challenging for intensivists to score it sufficiently at the bedside. We aimed to survey intensive care specialists about their perceptions, attitudes, and approaches towards the assessment of the gut in Australia and New Zealand intensive care units (ICUs). An electronic (online) questionnaire was used to survey intensive care specialists from the Australia and New Zealand Intensive Care Society (ANZICS). The survey comprised 10 questions focused on four key areas: (i) the extent of the problem with GDF in ICUs, (ii) the use and reliability of the current gut scoring tools, (iii) personal approaches and practices associated with GDF assessment, and (4) potential value of a novel GDF scoring system and its incorporation into an organ severity score. Our results showed that GDF was a significant concern amongst ICUs in Australia and New Zealand intensivists (84%; 66/79), with a small number of participants (14%; 3/79) using a gut scoring tool in their ICUs. Despite this, we have no established objective scoring tool for its assessment. The survey highlighted the need for developing a novel scoring tool to assess the gut was considered important amongst majority of the intensivists (92%; 72/78), which would prove useful in clinical practice and potentially lead to incorporation into an organ severity score in the future.
Asunto(s)
Cuidados Críticos , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , Humanos , Proyectos Piloto , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Enfermedad Crítica , Nueva ZelandaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to determine whether adjunctive hydrocortisone reduced healthcare expenditure and was cost-effective compared with placebo in New Zealand patients in the Adjunctive Glucocorticoid Therapy in Patients with Septic Shock (ADRENAL) trial. DESIGN: This is a health economic analysis using data linkage to New Zealand Ministry of Health databases to determine resource use, costs, and cost-effectiveness for a 24-month period. SETTING: The study was conducted in New Zealand. PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTION: Patients with septic shock were randomised to receive a 7-day continuous infusion of 200 mg of hydrocortisone or placebo in the ADRENAL trial. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Healthcare expenditure was associated with all hospital admissions, emergency department presentations, outpatient visits, and pharmacy expenditure. Effectiveness outcomes included mortality at 6 months and 24 months and quality of life at 6 months. Cost-effectiveness outcomes were assessed with reference to quality-adjusted life years gained at 6 months and life years gained at 24 months. RESULTS: Of 3800 patients in the ADRENAL trial, 419 (11.0%) were eligible, and 405 (96.7% of those eligible) were included. The mean total costs per patient over 24 months were $143,627 ± 100,890 and $143,772 ± 97,117 for the hydrocortisone and placebo groups, respectively (p = 0.99). Intensive care unit costs for the index admission were $50,492 and $62,288 per patient for the hydrocortisone and placebo groups, respectively (p = 0.09). The mean number of quality-adjusted life years gained at 6 months and mean number of life years gained at 24 months was not significantly different by treatment group, and the probability of hydrocortisone being cost-effective was 55% at 24 months. CONCLUSIONS: In New Zealand, adjunctive hydrocortisone did not reduce total healthcare expenditure or improve outcomes compared with placebo in patients with septic shock.