RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: The safety and efficacy of indwelling pleural catheters (IPCs) in lung allograft recipients is under-reported. METHODS: We performed a multicenter, retrospective analysis between 1/1/2010 and 6/1/2022 of consecutive IPCs placed in lung transplant recipients. Outcomes included incidence of infectious and non-infectious complications and rate of auto-pleurodesis. RESULTS: Seventy-one IPCs placed in 61 lung transplant patients at eight centers were included. The most common indication for IPC placement was recurrent post-operative effusion. IPCs were placed at a median of 59 days (IQR 40-203) post-transplant and remained for 43 days (IQR 25-88). There was a total of eight (11%) complications. Infection occurred in five patients (7%); four had empyema and one had a catheter tract infection. IPCs did not cause death or critical illness in our cohort. Auto-pleurodesis leading to the removal of the IPC occurred in 63 (89%) instances. None of the patients in this cohort required subsequent surgical decortication. CONCLUSIONS: The use of IPCs in lung transplant patients was associated with an infectious complication rate comparable to other populations previously studied. A high rate of auto-pleurodesis was observed. This work suggests that IPCs may be considered for the management of recurrent pleural effusions in lung allograft recipients.
Asunto(s)
Derrame Pleural Maligno , Humanos , Derrame Pleural Maligno/etiología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Receptores de Trasplantes , Catéteres de Permanencia/efectos adversos , PulmónRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Despite a growing number of tracheobronchial stent types and indications, complications remain frequent, and high-quality evidence on practices to prevent stent-related complications is lacking. Understanding current management practice is a first step to designing prospective studies to assess whether specific practices aimed at mitigating stent-related complications improve patient-centered outcomes. OBJECTIVES: In this study, we aimed to understand current management strategies following tracheobronchial stenting. METHOD: We performed a nationwide survey of members of the American Association of Bronchology and Interventional Pulmonology (AABIP) and the General Thoracic Surgical Club (GTSC) who place airway stents. The electronic survey captured data on practitioners' demographics, practice setting, airway stent volume, and standard post-stent practices (if any) including the use of medications, mucus clearance devices, surveillance imaging, and surveillance bronchoscopy. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-eight physicians completed the survey. Respondents were majority male (75.4%) and had diverse training (50.0% completed interventional pulmonary fellowship; 18.1% thoracic surgery; 31.9% other stent training). Post-stent management strategies varied markedly across respondents; 75.4% prescribe at least one medication to prevent post-stent complications, 52.9% perform routine surveillance bronchoscopy in asymptomatic patients, 26.1% prescribe mucus clearance regimens, 16.7% obtain routine computed tomography scans in asymptomatic patients, and 8.3% routinely replace their stents prior to stent failure. CONCLUSIONS: In this national survey of practitioners who place airway stents, there was marked heterogeneity in post-stent management approaches. Further studies are needed to identify which, if any, of these strategies improve patient-centered outcomes.
Asunto(s)
Obstrucción de las Vías Aéreas , Humanos , Masculino , Obstrucción de las Vías Aéreas/etiología , Estudios Prospectivos , Broncoscopía/efectos adversos , Stents , Evaluación de Resultado en la Atención de Salud , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the outcomes of tracheostomy in patients with COVID-19 respiratory failure. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Tracheostomy has an essential role in managing COVID-19 patients with respiratory failure who require prolonged mechanical ventilation. However, limited data are available on how tracheostomy affects COVID-19 outcomes, and uncertainty surrounding risk of infectious transmission has led to divergent recommendations and practices. METHODS: It is a multicenter, retrospective study; data were collected on all tracheostomies performed in COVID-19 patients at 7 hospitals in 5 tertiary academic medical systems from February 1, 2020 to September 4, 2020. RESULT: Tracheotomy was performed in 118 patients with median time from intubation to tracheostomy of 22âdays (Q1-Q3: 18-25). All tracheostomies were performed employing measures to minimize aerosol generation, 78.0% by percutaneous technique, and 95.8% at bedside in negative pressure rooms. Seventy-eight (66.1%) patients were weaned from the ventilator and 18 (15.3%) patients died from causes unrelated to tracheostomy. No major procedural complications occurred. Early tracheostomy (≤14âdays) was associated with decreased ventilator days; median ventilator days (Q1-Q3) among patients weaned from the ventilator in the early, middle and late groups were 21 (21-31), 34 (26.5-42), and 37 (32-41) days, respectively with P = 0.030. Compared to surgical tracheostomy, percutaneous technique was associated with faster weaning for patients weaned off the ventilator [median (Q1-Q3): 34 (29-39) vs 39 (34-51) days, P = 0.038]; decreased ventilator-associated pneumonia (58.7% vs 80.8%, P = 0.039); and among patients who were discharged, shorter intensive care unit duration [median (Q1-Q3): 33 (27-42) vs 47 (33-64) days, P = 0.009]; and shorter hospital length of stay [median (Q1-Q3): 46 (33-59) vs 59.5 (48-80) days, P = 0.001]. CONCLUSION: Early, percutaneous tracheostomy was associated with improved outcomes compared to surgical tracheostomy in a multi-institutional series of ventilated patients with COVID-19.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19/terapia , Neumonía Viral/terapia , Respiración Artificial , Insuficiencia Respiratoria/terapia , Insuficiencia Respiratoria/virología , Traqueostomía/métodos , Adulto , Anciano , Infección Hospitalaria/transmisión , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Neumonía Viral/virología , Estudios Retrospectivos , SARS-CoV-2 , Traqueotomía/métodos , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
CASE PRESENTATION: A 52-year-old woman was referred to the pulmonary office for evaluation of worsening dyspnea in August 2022. She had been diagnosed with asthma 22 years ago after she experienced chronic cough, sputum production, occasional wheezing, and mild exertional shortness of breath. Over the years, she was treated with different inhalers and was currently on triple inhaler therapy. A pulmonary function test in 2020 was normal. She had a history of ulcerative colitis and underwent a total colectomy in 1998. In the early 2000s, the patient also experienced episcleritis. Her other medical conditions included hyperlipidemia, gout, and gastroesophageal reflux disease.
Asunto(s)
Asma , Colitis Ulcerosa , Humanos , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Colitis Ulcerosa/complicaciones , Colitis Ulcerosa/diagnóstico , Disnea/diagnóstico , Disnea/etiología , Asma/diagnóstico , Ruidos Respiratorios/diagnóstico , Tos/diagnóstico , Diagnóstico DiferencialRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: National data on bronchoscopy for the evaluation of acute respiratory failure are lacking, and the limited available data suggest wide variation in use. RESEARCH QUESTION: How commonly is bronchoscopy performed among hospitalizations with acute respiratory failure? How has use changed over time and across hospitals? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: This was an observational cohort study of adult hospitalizations (2012-2018) treated with invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) using the National Inpatient Sample, which represents 97% of all hospitalizations in the United States. We measured the proportion of hospitalizations treated with IMV who underwent bronchoscopy and assessed trends in bronchoscopy use over time. Multilevel linear regression models were used to quantify hospital-level variation, adjusting for differences in patient and hospital characteristics. RESULTS: We identified 6,101,070 IMV-treated hospitalizations (2012-2018), of whom 609,405 underwent bronchoscopy; among hospitalizations receiving bronchoscopy, mean age was 61 years, 41.8% were women, and in-hospital mortality was 30.8%. The percentage of IMV-treated hospitalizations receiving bronchoscopy increased from 9.5% (95% CI, 9.1%-9.9%) in 2012 to 10.8% (95% CI, 10.4%-11.2%) in 2018 (P < .001 for difference). In 2018, bronchoscopy use varied from 0% to 57.1% among 1,787 hospitals, and in multilevel models adjusted for patient and hospital characteristics, 16.0% of the variation was explained at the hospital level. The median OR was 2.13 (95% CI, 2.05-2.21), indicating 113% increased odds of receiving bronchoscopy if moving from a lower-use to a higher-use hospital. INTERPRETATION: Bronchoscopy use among hospitalizations treated with IMV has increased over time. The large variation in use of bronchoscopy across hospitals suggests potentially unwarranted practice variation and need for further studies to clarify which patients benefit from bronchoscopy.
Asunto(s)
Broncoscopía , Insuficiencia Respiratoria , Adulto , Humanos , Femenino , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Persona de Mediana Edad , Masculino , Estudios Retrospectivos , Respiración Artificial , Estudios de Cohortes , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , Insuficiencia Respiratoria/terapiaRESUMEN
Rationale: Transbronchial lung biopsies (TBLBs) are commonly performed by pulmonologists. Most providers consider pulmonary hypertension to be at least a relative contraindication to TBLB. This practice is based primarily on expert opinion, as there are very few patient outcomes data backing it. Objectives: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of previously published studies to determine the safety of TBLB in patients with pulmonary hypertension. Methods: The MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases were searched for pertinent studies. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Meta-analysis was performed using MedCalc version 20.118 to calculate the weighted pooled relative risk of complications in patients with pulmonary hypertension. Results: Nine studies with a total of 1,699 patients were included in the meta-analysis. On the basis of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, the risk of bias was low in the included studies. The overall weighted relative risk of bleeding with TBLB in patients with pulmonary hypertension was 1.01 (95% confidence interval, 0.71-1.45) compared with patients without pulmonary hypertension. Heterogeneity was low; therefore, the fixed-effects model was used. In a subgroup analysis of three studies, the overall weighted relative risk of significant hypoxia in patients with pulmonary hypertension was 2.06 (95% confidence interval, 1.12-3.76). Conclusions: Our results show that the patients with pulmonary hypertension do not have a significantly elevated risk of bleeding with TBLB compared with control subjects. We hypothesize that significant postbiopsy bleeding might be preferentially originating from bronchial artery circulation as opposed to pulmonary artery circulation, much like episodes of massive spontaneous hemoptysis. This hypothesis can explain our results, as in this scenario, elevated pulmonary arterial pressure would not be expected to have a bearing on the risk of post-TBLB bleeding. Most of the studies in our analysis included patients with mild to moderate pulmonary hypertension and it is not clear if our results can be extrapolated to patients with severe pulmonary hypertension. We noted that the patients with pulmonary hypertension were at a higher risk of developing hypoxia and needing a longer duration of mechanical ventilation with TBLB compared with control subjects. Further studies are needed to better understand the origin and pathophysiology of post-TBLB bleeding.
Asunto(s)
Hipertensión Pulmonar , Enfermedades Pulmonares , Humanos , Hipertensión Pulmonar/etiología , Broncoscopía/efectos adversos , Broncoscopía/métodos , Biopsia/efectos adversos , Biopsia/métodos , Enfermedades Pulmonares/etiología , Hipoxia/etiología , Pulmón/patologíaRESUMEN
IMPORTANCE: Distinguishing benign from malignant pulmonary nodules is challenging. Evidence-based guidelines exist, but their impact on patient-centered outcomes is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To understand if the evaluation of incidental pulmonary nodules that follows an evidence-based management strategy is associated with fewer invasive procedures for benign lesions and/or fewer delays in cancer diagnosis. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Large academic medical center. PARTICIPANTS: Adults (≥18 years age) with an incidental pulmonary nodule discovered between January 2012 and December 2014. Patients with calcified nodules, prior nodules, prior diagnosis of cancer, high suspicion for pulmonary metastasis, or limited life expectancy were excluded. EXPOSURE: Nodule management strategy (pre-specified based on evidence-based practices). OUTCOME: Composite of any invasive procedure for a benign nodule or delay in diagnosis in patients with cancer (>3 month delay once probability of cancer was >15%). RESULTS: Of 314 patients that met inclusion criteria, median age was 61, 46.5% were men, and 66.5% had current or former tobacco use. The mean nodule size was 10.3 mm, mean probability of cancer was 11.8%, and 14.3% of nodules were malignant. Evaluation followed an evidence-based strategy in 245 patients (78.0%), and deviated in 69 patients (22%). The composite outcome occurred in 26 (8.3%) patients. Among patients whose nodule evaluation was concordant with an evidence-based evaluation, 6.1% (15/245) experienced the composite outcome versus 15.9% (11/69) of patients with an evaluation that deviated from evidence-based recommendations (P<0.01). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: At a large academic medical center, more than 1 in 5 patients with an incidental pulmonary nodule underwent evaluation that deviated from evidence-based practice recommendations. Nodule evaluation that deviated from an evidence-based strategy was associated with biopsy of benign lesions and delays in cancer diagnosis, suggesting a need to improve guideline uptake.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Pulmonares , Nódulos Pulmonares Múltiples , Nódulo Pulmonar Solitario , Adulto , Femenino , Humanos , Hallazgos Incidentales , Neoplasias Pulmonares/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Pulmonares/epidemiología , Neoplasias Pulmonares/patología , Masculino , Nódulos Pulmonares Múltiples/diagnóstico por imagen , Nódulos Pulmonares Múltiples/epidemiología , Prevalencia , Estudios Retrospectivos , Nódulo Pulmonar Solitario/diagnóstico , Nódulo Pulmonar Solitario/epidemiología , Nódulo Pulmonar Solitario/patologíaRESUMEN
Rationale: In 2017, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) developed a new surveillance definition of sepsis, the adult sepsis event (ASE), to better track sepsis epidemiology. The ASE requires evidence of acute organ dysfunction and defines baseline organ function pragmatically as the best in-hospital value. This approach may undercount sepsis if new organ dysfunction does not resolve by discharge.Objectives: To understand how sepsis identification and outcomes differ when using the best laboratory values during hospitalization versus methods that use historical lookbacks to define baseline organ function.Methods: We identified all patients hospitalized at 138 Veterans Affairs hospitals (2013-2018) admitted via the emergency department with two or more systemic inflammatory response criteria, were treated with antibiotics within 48 hours (i.e., had potential infection), and completed 4+ days of antibiotics (i.e., had suspected infection). We considered the following three approaches to defining baseline renal, hematologic, and liver function: the best values during hospitalization (as in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's ASE), the best values during hospitalization plus the prior 90 days (3-mo baseline), and the best values during hospitalization plus the prior 180 days (6-mo baseline). We determined how many patients met the criteria for sepsis by each approach, and then compared characteristics and outcomes of sepsis hospitalizations between the three approaches.Results: Among 608,128 hospitalizations with potential infection, 72.1%, 68.5%, and 58.4% had creatinine, platelet, and total bilirubin measured, respectively, in the prior 3 months. A total of 86.0%, 82.6%, and 74.8%, respectively, had these labs in the prior 6 months. Using the hospital baseline, 100,568 hospitalizations met criteria for community-acquired sepsis. By contrast, 111,983 and 117,435 met criteria for sepsis using the 3- and 6-month baselines, for a relative increase of 11% and 17%, respectively. Patient characteristics were similar across the three approaches. In-hospital mortality was 7.2%, 7.0%, and 6.8% for sepsis hospitalizations identified using the hospital, 3-month baseline, and 6-month baseline. The 30-day mortality was 12.5%, 12.7%, and 12.5%, respectively.Conclusions: Among veterans hospitalized with potential infection, the majority had laboratory values in the prior 6 months. Using 3- and 6-month lookbacks to define baseline organ function resulted in an 11% and 17% relative increase, respectively, in the number of sepsis hospitalizations identified.
Asunto(s)
Sepsis , Adulto , Estudios de Cohortes , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , Hospitalización , Humanos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Sepsis/diagnóstico , Sepsis/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
Importance: It is unclear whether antimicrobial timing for sepsis has changed outside of performance incentive initiatives. Objective: To examine temporal trends and variation in time-to-antibiotics for sepsis in the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) health care system. Design, Setting, and Participants: This observational cohort study included 130 VA hospitals from 2013 to 2018. Participants included all patients admitted to the hospital via the emergency department with sepsis from 2013 to 2018, using a definition adapted from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Adult Sepsis Event definition, which requires evidence of suspected infection, acute organ dysfunction, and systemic antimicrobial therapy within 12 hours of presentation. Data were analyzed from October 6, 2020, to July 1, 2021. Exposures: Time from presentation to antibiotic administration. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was differences in time-to-antibiotics across study periods, hospitals, and patient subgroups defined by presenting temperature and blood pressure. Temporal trends in time-to-antibiotics were measured overall and by subgroups. Hospital-level variation in time-to-antibiotics was quantified after adjusting for differences in patient characteristics using multilevel linear regression models. Results: A total of 111â¯385 hospitalizations for sepsis were identified, including 107â¯547 men (96.6%) men and 3838 women (3.4%) with a median (interquartile range [IQR]) age of 68 (62-77) years. A total of 7574 patients (6.8%) died in the hospital, and 13â¯855 patients (12.4%) died within 30 days. Median (IQR) time-to-antibiotics was 3.9 (2.4-6.5) hours but differed by presenting characteristics. Unadjusted median (IQR) time-to-antibiotics decreased over time, from 4.5 (2.7-7.1) hours during 2013 to 2014 to 3.5 (2.2-5.9) hours during 2017 to 2018 (P < .001). In multilevel models adjusted for patient characteristics, median time-to-antibiotics declined by 9.0 (95% CI, 8.8-9.2) minutes per calendar year. Temporal trends in time-to-antibiotics were similar across patient subgroups, but hospitals with faster baseline time-to-antibiotics had less change over time, with hospitals in the slowest tertile decreasing time-to-antibiotics by 16.6 minutes (23.1%) per year, while hospitals in the fastest tertile decreased time-to-antibiotics by 7.2 minutes (13.1%) per year. In the most recent years (2017-2018), median time-to-antibiotics ranged from 3.1 to 6.7 hours across hospitals (after adjustment for patient characteristics), 6.8% of variation in time-to-antibiotics was explained at the hospital level, and odds of receiving antibiotics within 3 hours increased by 65% (95% CI, 56%-77%) for the median patient if moving to a hospital with faster time-to-antibiotics. Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study across nationwide VA hospitals found that time-to-antibiotics for sepsis has declined over time. However, there remains significant variability in time-to-antibiotics not explained by patient characteristics, suggesting potential unwarranted practice variation in sepsis treatment. Efforts to further accelerate time-to-antibiotics must be weighed against risks of overtreatment.
Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos/administración & dosificación , Hospitalización , Sepsis/tratamiento farmacológico , Tiempo de Tratamiento/tendencias , Veteranos , Anciano , Estudios de Cohortes , Esquema de Medicación , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estados Unidos , United States Department of Veterans AffairsRESUMEN
ABSTRACT: During the spring 2020 COVID-19 surge, hospitals in Southeast Michigan were overwhelmed, and hospital beds were limited. However, it is unknown whether threshold for hospital admission varied across hospitals or over time.Using a statewide registry, we performed a retrospective cohort study. We identified adult patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in Southeast Michigan (3/1/2020-6/1/2020). We classified disease severity on admission using the World Health Organization (WHO) ordinal scale. Our primary measure of interest was the proportion of patients admitted on room air. We also determined the proportion without acute organ dysfunction on admission or any point during hospitalization. We quantified variation across hospitals and over time by half-month epochs.Among 1315 hospitalizations across 22 hospitals, 57.3% (754/1,315) were admitted on room air, and 26.1% (343/1,315) remained on room air for the duration of hospitalization. Across hospitals, the proportion of COVID-19 hospitalizations admitted on room air varied from 32.3% to 80.0%. Across half-month epochs, the proportion ranged from 49.4% to 69.4% and nadired in early April 2020. Among patients admitted on room air, 75.1% (566/754) had no acute organ dysfunction on admission, and 35.3% (266/754) never developed acute organ dysfunction at any point during hospitalization; there was marked variation in both proportions across hospitals. In-hospital mortality was 13.7% for patients admitted on room air vs 26.3% for patients requiring nasal cannula oxygen.Among patients hospitalized with COVID-19 during the spring 2020 surge in Southeast Michigan, more than half were on room air and a third had no acute organ dysfunction upon admission, but experienced high rates of disease progression and in-hospital mortality.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19/complicaciones , Hospitalización/estadística & datos numéricos , Anciano , Estudios de Cohortes , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Michigan , Persona de Mediana Edad , Índice de Severidad de la Enfermedad , Factores de TiempoRESUMEN
The American Thoracic Society Core Curriculum updates clinicians annually in adult and pediatric pulmonary disease, medical critical care, and sleep medicine at the annual international conference. The 2021 Pulmonary Core Curriculum focuses on lung cancer and include risks and prevention, screening, nodules, therapeutics and associated pulmonary toxicities, and malignant pleural effusions. Although tobacco smoking remains the primary risk factor for developing lung cancer, exposure to other environmental and occupational substances, including asbestos, radon, and burned biomass, contribute to the global burden of disease. Randomized studies have demonstrated that routine screening of high-risk smokers with low-dose chest computed tomography results in detection at an earlier stage and reduction in lung cancer mortality. On the basis of these trials and other lung cancer risk tools, screening recommendations have been developed. When evaluating lung nodules, clinical and radiographic features are used to estimate the probability of cancer. Management guidelines take into account the nodule size and cancer risk estimates to provide recommendations at evaluation. Newer lung cancer therapies, including immune checkpoint inhibitors and molecular therapies, cause pulmonary toxicity more frequently than conventional chemotherapy. Treatment-related toxicity should be suspected in patients receiving these medications who present with respiratory symptoms. Evaluation is aimed at excluding other etiologies, and treatment is based on the severity of symptoms. Malignant pleural effusions can be debilitating. The diagnosis is made by using simple pleural drainage and/or pleural biopsies. Management depends on the clinical scenario and the patient's preferences and includes the use of serial thoracentesis, a tunneled pleural catheter, or pleurodesis.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) results in substantial mortality but remains underdiagnosed in clinical practice. Automated ARDS "sniffer" systems, tools that can automatically analyze electronic medical record data, have been developed to improve recognition of ARDS in clinical practice. OBJECTIVES: To perform a systematic review examining the evidence underlying automated sniffer systems for ARDS detection. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE and Scopus databases through November 2018 to identify studies of tools using routinely available clinical data to detect patients with ARDS. DATA EXTRACTION: Study design, tool description, and diagnostic performance were extracted by two reviewers. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 was used to evaluate each study for risk of bias in four domains: patient selection, index test, reference standard, and study flow and timing. SYNTHESIS: Among 480 studies identified, 9 met inclusion criteria, and they evaluated six unique ARDS sniffer tools. Eight studies had derivation and/or temporal validation designs, with one also evaluating the effects of implementing a tool in clinical practice. A single study performed an external validation of previously published ARDS sniffer tools. Studies reported a wide range of sensitivities (43-98%) and positive predictive values (26-90%) for detection of ARDS. Most studies had potential for high risk of bias identified in their study design, including patient selection (five of nine), reference standard (four of nine), and flow and timing (three of nine). In the single external validation without any perceived risks of biases, the performance of ARDS sniffer tools was worse. CONCLUSIONS: Sniffer systems developed to detect ARDS had moderate to high predictive value in their derivation cohorts, although most studies had the potential for high risks of bias in study design. Methodological issues may explain some of the variability in tool performance. There remains an ongoing need for robust evaluation of ARDS sniffer systems and their impact on clinical practice. Systematic review registered with PROSPERO (CRD42015026584).