(1 → 3)-ß-D-Glucan-guided antifungal therapy in adults with sepsis: the CandiSep randomized clinical trial.

PURPOSE: To investigate whether (1 → 3)-ß-d-Glucan (BDG)-guidance shortens time to antifungal therapy and thereby reduces mortality of sepsis patients with high risk of invasive Candida infection (ICI). METHODS: Multicenter, randomized, controlled trial carried out between September 2016 and September 2019 in 18 intensive care units enrolling adult sepsis patients at high risk for ICI. Patients in the control group received targeted antifungal therapy driven by culture results. In addition to targeted therapy, patients in the BDG group received antifungals if at least one of two consecutive BDG samples taken during the first two study days was ≥ 80 pg/mL. Empirical antifungal therapy was discouraged in both groups. The primary endpoint was 28-day-mortality. RESULTS: 339 patients were enrolled. ICI was diagnosed in 48 patients (14.2%) within the first 96 h after enrollment. In the BDG-group, 48.8% (84/172) patients received antifungals during the first 96 h after enrollment and 6% (10/167) patients in the control group. Death until day 28 occurred in 58 of 172 patients (33.7%) in the BDG group and 51 of 167 patients (30.5%) in the control group (relative risk 1.10; 95% confidence interval, 0.80-1.51; p = 0.53). Median time to antifungal therapy was 1.1 [interquartile range (IQR) 1.0-2.2] days in the BDG group and 4.4 (IQR 2.0-9.1, p < 0.01) days in the control group. CONCLUSIONS: Serum BDG guided antifungal treatment did not improve 28-day mortality among sepsis patients with risk factors for but unexpected low rate of IC. This study cannot comment on the potential benefit of BDG-guidance in a more selected at-risk population.

Single-Center Evaluation of Treatment Success Using Two Different Protocols for MRI-Guided Transurethral Ultrasound Ablation of Localized Prostate Cancer.

OBJECTIVES: To assess differences in 24-month oncologic and functional outcomes in men with low to intermediate-risk prostate cancer treated with MRI-guided transurethral ultrasound ablation (TULSA) using intentionally conservative versus intensified treatment parameters. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients from a single center involved in two multicenter trials were included in this analysis. This included 14 of 30 patients with Gleason 3 + 3 from a Phase I study using intentionally conservative treatment parameters, and 15 of 115 patients with Gleason ≤ 3 + 4 from a pivotal study using intensified parameters. Follow-up data compared across these cohorts included 12-month biopsy and MRI for all patients, and 24-month PSA, micturition and quality of life (IIEF, IPSS, IPSS-QOL). The prognostic value of baseline parameters and PSA kinetics on 12-month histological recurrence was evaluated by logistic regression. RESULTS: 12-month biopsy revealed clinically significant residual disease in 4 (29%) and 2 (14%) patients from the Phase I and pivotal studies, respectively. PSA nadir was 0.7 ng/ml for Phase I and 0.5 ng/ml for pivotal study patients. Patient age at diagnosis, use of MRI fusion/systematic prostate biopsy, number of obtained cores at initial biopsy, PSA course, and PSA nadir were identified as prognostic factors for treatment success. All but one patient from each cohort maintained erection firmness sufficient for penetration. No cases of pad use were reported at 24 months. There were no Grade 4 or higher adverse events, and no late toxicity related to the procedure. CONCLUSION: Two-year follow-up demonstrated the efficacy of TULSA for the treatment of localized prostate cancer, and the durability of PSA and functional outcomes. Intensifying treatment parameters in the pivotal trial had no impact on safety or functional outcomes through 24 months, while reducing the recurrence rate for clinically significant disease. Careful patient selection by MRI fusion/systematic prostate biopsy and adequate follow-up through routine 12-month biopsy are recommended.

Long-Term Inhalative Sedation in Children With Pulmonary Diseases.

OBJECTIVES: To describe safety and feasibility of long-term inhalative sedation (LTIS) in children with severe respiratory diseases compared to patients with normal lung function with respect to recent studies that showed beneficial effects in adult patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). DESIGN: Single-center retrospective study. SETTING: 12-bed pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) in a tertiary-care academic medical center in Germany. PATIENTS: All patients treated in our PICU with LTIS using the AnaConDa® device between July 2011 and July 2019. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Thirty-seven courses of LTIS in 29 patients were analyzed. LTIS was feasible in both groups, but concomitant intravenous sedatives could be reduced more rapidly in children with lung diseases. Cardiocirculatory depression requiring vasopressors was observed in all patients. However, severe side effects only rarely occured. CONCLUSIONS: In this largest cohort of children treated with LTIS reported so far, LTIS was feasible even in children with severely impaired lung function. From our data, a prospective trial on the use of LTIS in children with ARDS seems justified. However, a thorough monitoring of cardiocirculatory side effects is mandatory.

A Randomized Open label Phase-II Clinical Trial with or without Infusion of Plasma from Subjects after Convalescence of SARS-CoV-2 Infection in High-Risk Patients with Confirmed Severe SARS-CoV-2 Disease (RECOVER): A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: Primary objectives • To assess the time from randomisation until an improvement within 84 days defined as two points on a seven point ordinal scale or live discharge from the hospital in high-risk patients (group 1 to group 4) with SARS-CoV-2 infection requiring hospital admission by infusion of plasma from subjects after convalescence of SARS-CoV-2 infection or standard of care. Secondary objectives • To assess overall survival, and the overall survival rate at 28 56 and 84 days. • To assess SARS-CoV-2 viral clearance and load as well as antibody titres. • To assess the percentage of patients that required mechanical ventilation. • To assess time from randomisation until discharge. TRIAL DESIGN: Randomised, open-label, multicenter phase II trial, designed to assess the clinical outcome of SARS-CoV-2 disease in high-risk patients (group 1 to group 4) following treatment with anti-SARS-CoV-2 convalescent plasma or standard of care. PARTICIPANTS: High-risk patients >18 years of age hospitalized with SARS-CoV-2 infection in 10-15 university medical centres will be included. High-risk is defined as SARS-CoV-2 positive infection with Oxygen saturation at ≤ 94% at ambient air with additional risk features as categorised in 4 groups: • Group 1, pre-existing or concurrent hematological malignancy and/or active cancer therapy (incl. chemotherapy, radiotherapy, surgery) within the last 24 months or less. • Group 2, chronic immunosuppression not meeting the criteria of group 1. • Group 3, age ≥ 50 - 75 years meeting neither the criteria of group 1 nor group 2 and at least one of these criteria: Lymphopenia < 0.8 x G/l and/or D-dimer > 1µg/mL. • Group 4, age ≥ 75 years meeting neither the criteria of group 1 nor group 2. Observation time for all patients is expected to be at least 3 months after entry into the study. Patients receive convalescent plasma for two days (day 1 and day 2) or standard of care. For patients in the standard arm, cross over is allowed from day 10 in case of not improving or worsening clinical condition. Nose/throat swabs for determination of viral load are collected at day 0 and day 1 (before first CP administration) and subsequently at day 2, 3, 5, 7, 10, 14, 28 or until discharge. Serum for SARS-Cov-2 diagnostic is collected at baseline and subsequently at day 3, 7, 14 and once during the follow-up period (between day 35 and day 84). There is a regular follow-up of 3 months. All discharged patients are followed by regular phone calls. All visits, time points and study assessments are summarized in the Trial Schedule (see full protocol Table 1). All participating trial sites will be supplied with study specific visit worksheets that list all assessments and procedures to be completed at each visit. All findings including clinical and laboratory data are documented by the investigator or an authorized member of the study team in the patient's medical record and in the electronic case report forms (eCRFs). INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: This trial will analyze the effects of convalescent plasma from recovered subjects with SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in high-risk patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Patients at high risk for a poor outcome due to underlying disease, age or condition as listed above are eligible for enrollment. In addition, eligible patients have a confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and O2 saturation ≤ 94% while breathing ambient air. Patients are randomised to receive (experimental arm) or not receive (standard arm) convalescent plasma in two bags (238 - 337 ml plasma each) from different donors (day 1, day 2). A cross over from the standard arm into the experimental arm is possible after day 10 in case of not improving or worsening clinical condition. MAIN OUTCOMES: Primary endpoints: The main purpose of the study is to assess the time from randomisation until an improvement within 84 days defined as two points on a seven-point ordinal scale or live discharge from the hospital in high-risk patients (group 1 to group 4) with SARS-CoV-2 infection requiring hospital admission by infusion of plasma from subjects after convalescence of a SARS-CoV-2 infection or standard of care. Secondary endpoints: • Overall survival, defined as the time from randomisation until death from any cause 28-day, 56-day and 84-day overall survival rates. • SARS-CoV-2 viral clearance and load as well as antibody titres. • Requirement mechanical ventilation at any time during hospital stay (yes/no). • Time until discharge from randomisation. • Viral load, changes in antibody titers and cytokine profiles are analysed in an exploratory manner using paired non-parametric tests (before - after treatment). RANDOMISATION: Upon confirmation of eligibility (patients must meet all inclusion criteria and must not meet exclusion criteria described in section 5.3 and 5.4 of the full protocol), the clinical site must contact a centralized internet randomization system ( https://randomizer.at/ ). Patients are randomized using block randomisation to one of the two arms, experimental arm or standard arm, in a 1:1 ratio considering a stratification according to the 4 risk groups (see Participants). BLINDING (MASKING): The study is open-label, no blinding will be performed. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): A total number of 174 patients is required for the entire trial, n=87 per group. TRIAL STATUS: Protocol version 1.2 dated 09/07/2020. A recruitment period of approximately 9 months and an overall study duration of approximately 12 months is anticipated. Recruitment of patients starts in the third quarter of 2020. The study duration of an individual patient is planned to be 3 months. After finishing all study-relevant procedures, therapy, and follow-up period, the patient is followed in terms of routine care and treated if necessary. Total trial duration: 18 months Duration of the clinical phase: 12 months First patient first visit (FPFV): 3rd Quarter 2020 Last patient first visit (LPFV): 2nd Quarter 2021 Last patient last visit (LPLV): 3rd Quarter 2021 Trial Report completed: 4th Quarter 2021 TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT Number: 2020-001632-10, https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/ctr-search/trial/2020-001632-10/DE , registered on 04/04/2020. FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol. The study protocol has been reported in accordance with the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Clinical Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) guidelines (Additional file 2). The eCRF is attached (Additional file 3).

Presepsin for pre-operative prediction of major adverse cardiovascular events in coronary heart disease patients undergoing noncardiac surgery: Post hoc analysis of the Leukocytes and Cardiovascular Peri-operative Events-2 (LeukoCAPE-2) Study.

BACKGROUND: Accurate pre-operative evaluation of cardiovascular risk is vital to identify patients at risk for major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) after noncardiac surgery. Elevated presepsin (sCD14-ST) is associated with peri-operative MACCE in coronary artery disease (CAD) patients after noncardiac surgery. OBJECTIVES: Validating the prognostic utility of presepsin for MACCE after noncardiac surgery. DESIGN: Prospective patient enrolment and blood sampling, followed by post hoc evaluation of pre-operative presepsin for prediction of MACCE. SETTING: Single university centre. PATIENTS: A total of 222 CAD patients undergoing elective, inpatient noncardiac surgery. INTERVENTION: Pre-operative presepsin measurement. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: MACCE (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, myocardial ischaemia and stroke) at 30 days postsurgery. RESULTS: MACCE was diagnosed in 23 (10%) patients. MACCE patients presented with increased pre-operative presepsin (median [IQR]; 212 [163 to 358] vs. 156 [102 to 273] pgml, P = 0.023). Presepsin exceeding the previously derived threshold of 184 pg ml was associated with increased 30-day MACCE rate. After adjustment for confounders, presepsin more than 184 pg ml [OR = 2.8 (95% confidence interval 1.1 to 7.3), P = 0.03] remained an independent predictor of peri-operative MACCE. Predictive accuracy of presepsin was moderate [area under the curve (AUC) = 0.65 (0.54 to 0.75), P = 0.023]. While the basic risk model of revised cardiac risk index, high-sensitive cardiac troponin T and N-terminal fragment of pro-brain natriuretic peptide resulted in an AUC = 0.62 (0.48 to 0.75), P = 0.072, addition of presepsin to the model led to an AUC = 0.67 (0.56 to 0.78), P = 0.009 and (ΔAUC = 0.05, P = 0.438). Additive risk predictive value of presepsin was demonstrated by integrated discrimination improvement analysis (integrated discrimination improvement = 0.023, P = 0.022). Net reclassification improvement revealed that the additional strength of presepsin was attributed to the reclassification of no-MACCE patients into a lower risk group. CONCLUSION: Increased pre-operative presepsin independently predicted 30-day MACCE in CAD patients undergoing major noncardiac surgery. Complementing cardiovascular risk prediction by inflammatory biomarkers, such as presepsin, offers potential to improve peri-operative care. However, as prediction accuracy of presepsin was only moderate, further validation studies are needed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT03105427.

Preoperative neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio and platelet to lymphocyte ratio are associated with major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events in coronary heart disease patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery.

BACKGROUND: Preoperative risk prediction in patients at elevated cardiovascular risk shows limited accuracy. Platelet to lymphocyte ratio (PLR) and neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) indicate systemic inflammation. Both have been investigated for outcome prediction in the field of oncology and cardiovascular medicine, as well as risk prediction of adverse cardiovascular events in non-surgical patients at increased cardiovascular risk. METHODS: For this post-hoc analysis, we included all 38 coronary heart disease patients from the Leukocytes and Cardiovascular Perioperative Events cohort-1 study scheduled for elective non-cardiac surgery. We evaluated preoperative differential blood counts for association with major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) defined as the composite endpoint of death, myocardial ischemia, myocardial infarction, myocardial injury after non-cardiac surgery, or embolic or thrombotic stroke within 30 days after surgery. We used Youden's index to calculate cut-off values for PLR and NLR. Additive risk-predictive values were assessed using receiver operating characteristic curve and net reclassification (NRI) improvement analyses. RESULTS: Patients with the composite endpoint MACCE had higher PLR and NLR (309 [206; 380] vs. 160 [132; 203], p = 0.001; 4.9 [3.5; 8.1] vs. 2.6 [2.2; 3.4]), p = 0.001). Calculated cut-offs for PLR > 204.4 and NLR > 3.1 were associated with increased risk of 30-day MACCE (OR 7, 95% CI [1.2; 44.7], p = 0.034; OR 36, 95% CI [1.8; 686.6], p = 0.001). Furthermore, NLR improved risk prediction in coronary heart disease patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery when combined with hs-cTnT or NT-proBNP (NRI total = 0.23, p = 0.008, NRI total = 0.26, p = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: Both PLR and NLR were associated with perioperative cardiovascular adverse events in coronary heart disease patients. NLR proved to be of additional value for preoperative risk stratification. Both PLR and NLR could be used as inexpensive and broadly available tools for perioperative risk assessment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02874508, August 22, 2016.

Evaluation of Renal Safety Between Imipenem/Relebactam and Colistin Plus Imipenem in Patients With Imipenem-Nonsusceptible Bacterial Infections in the Randomized, Phase 3 RESTORE-IMI 1 Study.

BACKGROUND: In the randomized controlled RESTORE-IMI 1 clinical trial (NCT02452047), imipenem/cilastatin (IMI) with relebactam (IMI/REL) was as effective as colistin plus IMI for the treatment of imipenem-nonsusceptible gram-negative infections. Differences in nephrotoxicity were observed between treatment arms. As there is no standard definition of nephrotoxicity used in clinical trials, we conducted analyses to further understand the renal safety profile of both treatments. METHODS: Nephrotoxicity was retrospectively evaluated using 2 acute kidney injury assessment criteria (Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes [KDIGO] and Risk, Injury, Failure, Loss, and End-stage Kidney Disease [RIFLE]). Additional outcomes included time to onset of protocol-defined nephrotoxicity and incidence of renal adverse events. RESULTS: Of 47 participants receiving treatment, 45 had sufficient data to assess nephrotoxicity (IMI/REL, n = 29; colistin plus IMI, n = 16). By KDIGO criteria, no participants in the IMI/REL but 31.3% in the colistin plus IMI group experienced stage 3 acute kidney injury. No IMI/REL-treated participants experienced renal failure by RIFLE criteria, vs 25.0% for colistin plus IMI. Overall, the time to onset of nephrotoxicity varied considerably (2-22 days). Fewer renal adverse events (12.9% vs 37.5%), including discontinuations due to drug-related renal adverse events (0% vs 12.5%), were observed in the IMI/REL group compared with the colistin plus IMI group, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our analyses confirm the findings of a preplanned end point and provide further evidence that IMI/REL had a more favorable renal safety profile than colistin-based therapy in patients with serious, imipenem-nonsusceptible gram-negative bacterial infections. CLINICALTRIALSGOV IDENTIFIER: NCT02452047.

Continuous wound infiltration versus epidural analgesia for midline abdominal incisions - a randomized-controlled pilot trial (Painless-Pilot trial; DRKS Number: DRKS00008023).

OBJECTIVES: To test the feasibility of a randomized controlled study design comparing epidural analgesia (EDA) with continuous wound infiltration (CWI) in respect to postoperative complications and mobility to design a future multicentre randomized controlled trial. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS: CWI has been developed to address drawbacks of EDA. Previous studies have established the equivalent analgesic potential of CWI compared to EDA. This is a single centre, non-blinded pilot randomized controlled trial at a tertiary surgical centre. Patients undergoing elective non-colorectal surgery via a midline laparotomy were randomized to EDA or CWI. Endpoints included recruitment, feasibility of assessing postoperative mobility with a pedometer and morbidity. No primary endpoint was defined and all analyses were explorative. INTERVENTIONS: CWI with local anaesthetics (experimental group) vs. thoracic EDA (control). RESULTS: Of 846 patients screened within 14 months, 71 were randomized and 62 (31 per group) included in the intention-to-treat analysis. Mobility was assessed in 44 of 62 patients and revealed no differences within the first 3 postoperative days. Overall morbidity did not differ between the two groups (measured via the comprehensive complication index). Median pain scores at rest were comparable between the two groups, while EDA was superior in pain treatment during movement on the first, but not on the second and third postoperative day. Duration of preoperative induction of anaesthesia was shorter with CWI than with EDA. Of 17 serious adverse events, 3 were potentially related to EDA, while none was related to CWI. CONCLUSION: This trial confirmed the feasibility of a randomized trial design to compare CWI and EDA regarding morbidity. Improvements in the education and training of team members are necessary to improve recruitment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: DRKS00008023.

Frontline Science: Low regulatory T cells predict perioperative major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events after noncardiac surgery.

Immune cells drive atherosclerotic lesion progression and plaque destabilization. Coronary heart disease patients undergoing noncardiac surgery are at risk for perioperative major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE). It is unclear whether differential leukocyte subpopulations contribute to perioperative MACCE and thereby could aid identification of patients prone to perioperative cardiovascular events. First, we performed a hypothesis-generating post hoc analysis of the LeukoCAPE-1 study (n = 38). We analyzed preoperative counts of 6 leukocyte subpopulations in coronary heart disease patients for association with MACCE (composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, myocardial ischemia, myocardial injury after noncardiac surgery, thromboembolic stroke) within 30 d after surgery. Regulatory T cells (Tregs) were the only leukocyte subgroup associated with MACCE. We found reduced Tregs in patients experiencing MACCE versus no-MACCE (0.02 [0.01; 0.03] vs. 0.04 [0.03; 0.05] Tregs nl-1 , P = 0.002). Using Youden index, we derived the optimal threshold value for association with MACCE to be 0.027 Tregs nl-1 . Subsequently, we recruited 233 coronary heart disease patients for the prospective, observational LeukoCAPE-2 study and independently validated this Treg cutoff for prediction of MACCE within 30 d after noncardiac surgery. After multivariate logistic regression, Tregs < 0.027 cells nl-1 remained an independent predictor for MACCE (OR = 2.54 [1.22; 5.23], P = 0.012). Tregs improved risk discrimination of the revised cardiac risk index based on ΔAUC (area under the curve; ΔAUC = 0.09, P = 0.02), NRI (0.26), and IDI (0.06). Preoperative Treg levels below 0.027 cells nl-1 predicted perioperative MACCE and can be measured to increase accuracy of established preoperative cardiac risk stratification in coronary heart disease patients undergoing noncardiac surgery.

RESTORE-IMI 1: A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-blind Trial Comparing Efficacy and Safety of Imipenem/Relebactam vs Colistin Plus Imipenem in Patients With Imipenem-nonsusceptible Bacterial Infections.

BACKGROUND: The ß-lactamase inhibitor relebactam can restore imipenem activity against imipenem-nonsusceptible gram-negative pathogens. We evaluated imipenem/relebactam for treating imipenem-nonsusceptible infections. METHODS: Randomized, controlled, double-blind, phase 3 trial. Hospitalized patients with hospital-acquired/ventilator-associated pneumonia, complicated intraabdominal infection, or complicated urinary tract infection caused by imipenem-nonsusceptible (but colistin- and imipenem/relebactam-susceptible) pathogens were randomized 2:1 to 5-21 days imipenem/relebactam or colistin+imipenem. Primary endpoint: favorable overall response (defined by relevant endpoints for each infection type) in the modified microbiologic intent-to-treat (mMITT) population (qualifying baseline pathogen and ≥1 dose study treatment). Secondary endpoints: clinical response, all-cause mortality, and treatment-emergent nephrotoxicity. Safety analyses included patients with ≥1 dose study treatment. RESULTS: Thirty-one patients received imipenem/relebactam and 16 colistin+imipenem. Among mITT patients (n = 21 imipenem/relebactam, n = 10 colistin+imipenem), 29% had Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II scores >15, 23% had creatinine clearance <60 mL/min, and 35% were aged ≥65 years. Qualifying baseline pathogens: Pseudomonas aeruginosa (77%), Klebsiella spp. (16%), other Enterobacteriaceae (6%). Favorable overall response was observed in 71% imipenem/relebactam and 70% colistin+imipenem patients (90% confidence interval [CI] for difference, -27.5, 21.4), day 28 favorable clinical response in 71% and 40% (90% CI, 1.3, 51.5), and 28-day mortality in 10% and 30% (90% CI, -46.4, 6.7), respectively. Serious adverse events (AEs) occurred in 10% of imipenem/relebactam and 31% of colistin+imipenem patients, drug-related AEs in 16% and 31% (no drug-related deaths), and treatment-emergent nephrotoxicity in 10% and 56% (P = .002), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Imipenem/relebactam is an efficacious and well-tolerated treatment option for carbapenem-nonsusceptible infections. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT02452047.

Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study of Intravenous Amisulpride as Treatment of Established Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting in Patients Who Have Had No Prior Prophylaxis.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) occurs commonly in surgical patients despite widespread prophylactic antiemetic use. Rescue options are currently limited. 5HT3 antagonists are most frequently used for prophylaxis, but if they fail, additional doses are not effective as rescue medication. Intravenous (IV) amisulpride, a well-studied D2/D3 antagonist, has been shown in trials to prevent PONV. This study was designed to determine if amisulpride could be used to treat established PONV in patients at low-to-moderate risk of PONV who had not received any prior prophylaxis. METHODS: Men and women aged over 18 years were permitted to enroll if they were to undergo general inhalational anesthesia, expected to last at least 1 hour, for an outpatient or inpatient surgical procedure. Patients who then suffered PONV were randomized equally to 1 of 3 single-dose IV regimens: placebo or 5 or 10 mg amisulpride. The primary end point was complete response, defined as no emesis in the period 30 minutes to 24 hours after study drug treatment and no use of rescue medication in the entire 24-hour period. RESULTS: One thousand nine hundred eighty-eight patients were enrolled preoperatively, of whom 560 were randomized to a treatment arm. Complete response occurred in 39 of 181 patients (21.5%) in the placebo group compared to 60 of 191 patients (31.4%; P = .016) and 59 of 188 patients (31.4%; P = .016) in the amisulpride 5 and 10 mg groups, respectively. The adverse event profile of amisulpride at either dose was similar to placebo. CONCLUSIONS: IV amisulpride at 5 and 10 mg was safe and efficacious in the treatment of established PONV in surgical patients undergoing general anesthesia with no prior PONV prophylaxis.

Elevated Presepsin Is Associated With Perioperative Major Adverse Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Complications in Elevated-Risk Patients Undergoing Noncardiac Surgery: The Leukocytes and Cardiovascular Perioperative Events Study.

BACKGROUND: Perioperative major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs) are incompletely understood, and risk prediction is imprecise. Atherogenic leukocytes are crucial in cardiovascular events. However, it is unclear if surgical interventions affect leukocyte counts or activation status. Therefore, we investigated whether noncardiac surgery in patients with elevated cardiovascular risk is associated with changes in atherogenic leukocyte subsets and if these changes are related to perioperative MACCEs. METHODS: We enrolled 40 patients in this single-center prospective observational cohort study. Total leukocytes and subpopulations, including classical, intermediate, and nonclassical monocytes and natural killer and regulatory T cells, were quantified before surgery, at 2 and 6 hours after skin incision, and at postoperative days 1 and 2 (POD1+2). The monocyte activation marker presepsin (sCD14-ST) was measured post hoc to determine differentiation of classical to nonclassical monocytes. We evaluated presepsin for prediction of the composite primary end point MACCE (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, myocardial ischemia, and stroke) at 30 days. Its additive value to risk assessment based on high-sensitive cardiac troponin T and N-terminal probrain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) was analyzed. RESULTS: We evaluated 38 patients, of whom 5 (13%) reached MACCE. In the entire cohort, classical monocytes continuously increased and peaked at POD1 (0.35 [0.23-0.43] cells per nanoliter blood [nL] vs 0.45 [0.31-0.66] cells·nL, preoperative [pre-OP] vs POD1, P = .002). Intermediate monocytes doubled by POD1 (0.017 [0.013-0.021] vs 0.036 [0.022-0.043] cells·nL, pre-OP versus POD1, P = .0003). Nonclassical monocytes decreased (0.022 [0.012-0.032] vs 0.012 [0.005-0.023] cells·nL, pre-OP vs 6 hours, P = .003). In our patient population, we did not detect changes in any of the other predefined leukocyte subsets investigated. In patients experiencing a MACCE, classical monocyte expansion was reduced (0.081 [-0.16 to 0.081] cells·nL vs 0.179 [0.081 to 0.292] cells·nL, MACCE versus non-MACCE, P = .016). Patients in the event group presented with elevated pre-OP presepsin (1528 [406-1897] pg·mL vs 123 [82.2-174] pg·mL, MACCE versus non-MACCE, P = .0001). Presepsin was associated with MACCE (area under the curve = 0.964, [0.846-0.998], P = .001). Presepsin above the calculated threshold >184 pg·mL was superior to high-sensitive cardiac troponin T for improvement of NT-proBNP-based risk prediction (28 [74%] vs 22 [58%] correctly classified patients, P = .014). CONCLUSIONS: Noncardiac surgery was associated with an increase in atherogenic leukocyte subsets. In a post hoc analysis, elevated pre-OP presepsin was associated with MACCE and improved NT-proBNP-based risk assessment. After validation in an independent data set, a presepsin cutoff of 184 pg·mL might qualify to complement NT-proBNP-based risk prediction, thereby increasing the proportion of correctly identified high-risk patients.

Effect of physostigmine on recovery from septic shock following intra-abdominal infection - Results from a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, monocentric pilot trial (Anticholium® per Se).

PURPOSE: The cholinergic anti-inflammatory pathway has been shown to be accessible by physostigmine salicylate in animal models. However, the cholinesterase inhibitor is not approved for adjunctive therapy in sepsis, and tolerability and safety of high initial doses followed by continuous infusion have not been investigated. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this trial, 20 patients with perioperative septic shock due to intra-abdominal infection were eligible. The physostigmine group received an initial dose of 0.04 mg/kg physostigmine salicylate, followed by continuous infusion of 1 mg/h for 120 h; the placebo group was treated with 0.9% sodium chloride. Primary outcome was the mean Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score during treatment and up to 14 days. RESULTS: Administration of physostigmine salicylate was well tolerated. Mean SOFA scores were 8.9 ±â€¯2.5 and 11.3 ±â€¯3.6 (mean ±â€¯SD) for physostigmine and placebo group, respectively. Adjusted for age, difference between means was not statistically significant (-2.37, 95% CI: -5.43 to 0.70, p = 0.121). Norepinephrine doses required only appeared lower in the physostigmine group (p = 0.064), along with a more rapid reduction from an elevated heart rate possibly indicating less hemodynamic instability. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with physostigmine salicylate was feasible and safe. Further studies are justified to assess the effect on recovery from septic shock. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT Number 2012-001650-26, ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT03013322.

Amisulpride for the Rescue Treatment of Postoperative Nausea or Vomiting in Patients Failing Prophylaxis: A Randomized, Placebo-controlled Phase III Trial.

BACKGROUND: Although antiemetics are commonly used to prevent postoperative nausea or vomiting, the failure rate is appreciable and there is currently no generally accepted standard for rescue treatment of postoperative nausea or vomiting after failed prophylaxis. This prospective, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled, multicenter study was designed to test the hypothesis that intravenous amisulpride, a dopamine D2/D3-antagonist, is superior to placebo at treating established postoperative nausea or vomiting after failed prophylaxis. METHODS: A total of 2,285 adult patients undergoing surgery under general inhalational anesthesia and receiving standard antiemetic prophylaxis were enrolled at 23 sites in Canada, France, Germany, and the United States. Of these, 702 patients experienced postoperative nausea or vomiting in the 24-h period after surgery and were randomized to receive a single dose of 5 or 10 mg intravenous amisulpride or matching placebo. The primary endpoint was complete response, defined as no emesis or rescue antiemetic use for 24 h after study drug administration, excluding emesis in the first 30 min. Secondary endpoints included incidence of emesis and rescue medication use, nausea burden, time to treatment failure, and length of stay in postanesthesia care unit and hospital. RESULTS: Complete response occurred in significantly more patients receiving 10 mg amisulpride (96 of 230, 41.7%) than placebo (67 of 235, 28.5%), a 13.2% difference (95% CI, 4.6 to 21.8; odds ratio, 1.80; P = 0.006). A 5-mg dose of amisulpride did not show a significant benefit (80 of 237, 33.8%); the difference from placebo was 5.2% (95% CI, 3.1 to 13.6; odds ratio, 1.24; P = 0.109). The total number of adverse events recorded and proportion of patients with at least one adverse event were comparable between the placebo and amisulpride groups. No clinically relevant toxicities were observed. CONCLUSIONS: A single 10-mg dose of intravenous amisulpride was safe and more effective than placebo at treating established postoperative nausea or vomiting in patients failing postoperative nausea or vomiting prophylaxis.

GTS-21 reduces microvascular permeability during experimental endotoxemia.

INTRODUCTION: No effective pharmacological therapy is currently available to attenuate tissue edema formation due to increased microvascular permeability in sepsis. Cholinergic mediators have been demonstrated to exert anti-inflammatory effects via the α7 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor (α7nAChR) during inflammation. GTS-21, a partial α7nAChR agonist, is an appealing therapeutic substance for sepsis-induced microvascular inflammation due to its demonstrated cholinergic anti-inflammatory properties and its favorable safety profile in clinical trials. This study evaluated the effect of GTS-21 on microvascular permeability and leukocyte adhesion during experimental endotoxemia. METHODS: Male Wistar rats (n=60) were anesthetized and prepared for intravital microscopy (IVM). Sevoflurane inhalation combined with propofol (10mg/kg) and fentanyl (5µg/kg) was used for anesthesia induction, followed by continuous intravenous anesthesia with propofol (10-40mg/kg/h) and fentanyl (10µg/kg/h). The rat mesentery was prepared for evaluation of macromolecular leakage, leukocyte adhesion and venular wall shear rate in postcapillary venules using IVM. Following baseline IVM recording, GTS-21 (1mg/kg) was applied simultaneously with, 1h prior to and 1h after administration of lipopolysaccharide (LPS, 5mg/kg). Test substances (crystalloid solution, LPS, GTS-21) were administered as volume equivalent intravenous infusions over 5min in the respective treatment groups. The consecutive IVMs were performed at 60, 120 and 180min after the baseline IVM. The systemic inflammatory response was evaluated by measuring TNF-α levels after the 180min IVM. RESULTS: Microvascular permeability was significantly reduced in animals treated with GTS-21 simultaneously and 1h after induction of endotoxemia. Leukocyte adhesion, venular wall shear rate and TNF-α levels were not affected by GTS-21 treatment compared to the untreated endotoxemic animals. CONCLUSION: GTS-21 has a protective effect on microvascular barrier function during endotoxemia. Considering its anti-inflammatory efficacy and safety profile, its clinical use might prove beneficial for the treatment of capillary leakage in sepsis therapy.

Adjunctive use of physostigmine salicylate (Anticholium®) in perioperative sepsis and septic shock: study protocol for a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, monocentric trial (Anticholium® per Se).

BACKGROUND: Severe sepsis and septic shock remain a major challenge, even in modern intensive care. In Germany, about 68,000 patients die annually because of septic diseases, characterized by a complex systemic inflammatory response. Causal treatment of the underlying infection is essential for successful management of sepsis, but the course can be positively influenced by supportive and adjuvant measures. The cholinergic anti-inflammatory pathway (CAP) represents a new approach to adjunctive therapy of septic diseases and can be pharmacologically activated by the acetylcholinesterase inhibitor physostigmine (Anticholium®). Promising effects can be found in several in vitro and in vivo models of sepsis, such as a reduction in pro-inflammatory cytokines and improved survival. METHODS: Anticholium® per Se is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, monocentric trial to assess whether the CAP can be transferred from bench to bedside. In this pilot study, 20 patients with perioperative sepsis and septic shock as a result of intra-abdominal infection are enrolled. According to randomization, participants are treated with physostigmine salicylate (verum group) or 0.9% sodium chloride (placebo group) for up to 5 days. The mean Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score during treatment and subsequent intensive care of up to 14 days is used as surrogate outcome (primary endpoint). Secondary outcome measures include 30- and 90-day mortality. An embedded pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics study investigates plasma concentrations of physostigmine and its metabolite eseroline. Further analyses will contribute to our understanding of the role of various cytokines in the pathophysiology of human sepsis. A computer-generated list is used for block randomization. DISCUSSION: This randomized, controlled, monocentric trial investigates for the first time the adjunctive use of physostigmine (Anticholium®) in patients with perioperative sepsis and septic shock and may be a pivotal step toward the clinical use in this indication. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT Number: 2012-001650-26 (entered 14 August 2012), ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03013322 (registered on 1 Jan 2017).

Data on microcirculatory parameters of GTS- 21 treated rats assessed by intravital microscopy.

This article contains animal experimental data associated with the research article entitled "GTS-21 reduces microvascular permeability during experimental endotoxemia" (Schmidt et al., 2017) [1] (supplementary datasets of baseline intravital microscopic measurements, baseline TNF-α levels and vital parameters of the evaluated experimental groups are provided). Beneficial anti-inflammatory effects of cholinergic mediators on microvascular inflammation have been demonstrated by intravital microscopic investigations (Schmidt et al., 2015) [2], therefore we evaluated the effect of the cholinergic mediator GTS-21 on microcirculatory alterations during endotoxemia [1]. The data regarding microcirculatory effects of GTS-21 treatment ((3-(2,4-Dimethoxybenzylidene)-anabaseine dihydrochloride; 1 mg/kg; i.v.) in non-endotoxemic animals are presented in this article.

Intravenous Amisulpride for the Prevention of Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting: Two Concurrent, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND: Two essentially identical, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group phase III studies evaluated the efficacy of intravenous amisulpride, a dopamine D2/D3 antagonist, in the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting in adult surgical patients. METHODS: Adult inpatients undergoing elective surgery during general anesthesia and having at least two of the four Apfel risk factors for postoperative nausea and vomiting were enrolled at 9 U.S. and 10 European sites. A single 5-mg dose of amisulpride or matching placebo was given at induction of anesthesia. The primary endpoint was complete response, defined as no vomiting/retching and no use of antiemetic rescue medication in the 24-h postoperative period. Nausea incidence was a secondary endpoint. RESULTS: Across the two studies, 689 patients were randomized and dosed with study medication, of whom 626 were evaluable per protocol. In the U.S. study, 46.9% (95% CI, 39.0 to 54.9) of patients achieved complete response in the amisulpride group compared to 33.8% (95% CI, 26.2 to 42.0) in the placebo group (P = 0.026). In the European study, complete response rates were 57.4% (95% CI, 49.2 to 65.3) for amisulpride and 46.6% (95% CI, 38.8 to 54.6) for placebo (P = 0.070). Nausea occurred less often in patients who received amisulpride than those who received placebo. There was no clinically significant difference in the safety profile of amisulpride and placebo; in particular, there were no differences in terms of QT prolongation, extrapyramidal side effects, or sedation. CONCLUSIONS: One of the two trials demonstrated superiority, while pooling both in a post hoc change to the plan of analysis supported the hypothesis that amisulpride was safe and superior to placebo in reducing the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting in a population of adult inpatients at moderate to high risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting.