Lactated Ringer vs Normal Saline Solution During Sickle Cell Vaso-Occlusive Episodes.

Importance: Sickle cell disease (SCD), a clinically heterogenous genetic hemoglobinopathy, is characterized by painful vaso-occlusive episodes (VOEs) that can require hospitalization. Patients admitted with VOEs are often initially resuscitated with normal saline (NS) to improve concurrent hypovolemia, despite preclinical evidence that NS may promote erythrocyte sickling. The comparative effectiveness of alternative volume-expanding fluids (eg, lactated Ringer [LR]) for resuscitation during VOEs is unclear. Objective: To compare the effectiveness of LR to NS fluid resuscitation in patients with SCD and VOEs. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter cohort study and target trial emulation included inpatient adults with SCD VOEs who received either LR or NS on hospital day 1. The Premier PINC AI database (2016-2022), a multicenter clinical database including approximately 25% of US hospitalizations was used. The analysis took place between October 6, 2023, and June 20, 2024. Exposure: Receipt of LR (intervention) or NS (control) on hospital day 1. Main Outcome and Measures: The primary outcome was hospital-free days (HFDs) by day 30. Targeted maximum likelihood estimation was used to calculate marginal effect estimates. Heterogeneity of treatment effect was explored in subgroups. Results: A total of 55 574 patient encounters where LR (n = 3495) or NS (n = 52 079) was administered on hospital day 1 were included; the median (IQR) age was 30 (25-37) years. Patients who received LR had more HFDs compared with those who received NS (marginal mean difference, 0.4; 95% CI, 0.1-0.6 days). Patients who received LR also had shorter hospital lengths of stay (marginal mean difference, -0.4; 95% CI, -0.7 to -0.1 days) and lower risk of 30-day readmission (marginal risk difference, -5.8%; 95% CI, -9.8% to -1.8%). Differences in HFDs between LR and NS were heterogenous based on fluid volume received: among patients who received less than 2 L, there was no difference in LR vs NS; among those who received 2 or more L, LR was superior to NS. Conclusion and Relevance: This cohort study found that, compared with NS, LR had a small but significant improvement in HFDs and secondary outcomes including 30-day readmission. These results suggest that, among patients with VOEs in whom clinicians plan to give volume resuscitation fluids on hospital admission, LR should be preferred over NS.

Evaluation of Etomidate Use and Association with Mortality Compared with Ketamine Among Critically Ill Patients.

RATIONALE: Uncertainty remains regarding the risks associated with single dose use of etomidate. OBJECTIVES: To assess use of etomidate in critically ill patients and compare outcomes for patients who received etomidate versus ketamine. METHODS: We assessed patients who received invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), admitted to an ICU in the Premier Healthcare Database, 2008-2021. The exposure was receipt of etomidate on the day of IMV initiation and the main outcome was hospital mortality. Using multivariable regression we compared patients who received IMV within the first two days of hospitalization who received etomidate with propensity-score matched patients who received ketamine. We also assessed whether receipt of corticosteroids in the days after intubation modified the association between etomidate and mortality. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Of 1,689,945 patients who received IMV, nearly half (738,855; 43.7%) received etomidate. Among those who received IMV in the first two days of hospitalization, we established 22,273 matched pairs given either etomidate or ketamine. In the primary analysis, receipt of etomidate was associated with greater hospital mortality relative to ketamine (21.6% vs 18.7%; absolute risk difference: 2.8%, 95% CI 2.1%, 3.6%; adjusted odds ratio: 1.28, 95% CI 1.21,1.34). This was consistent across subgroups and sensitivity analyses. We found no attenuation of the association with mortality with receipt of corticosteroids in the days following etomidate use. CONCLUSIONS: Use of etomidate on the day of IMV initiation is common and associated with a higher odds of hospital mortality compared with ketamine. This finding is independent of subsequent treatment with corticosteroids.

Opioid Administration Practice Patterns in Patients With Acute Respiratory Failure Who Undergo Invasive Mechanical Ventilation.

IMPORTANCE: The opioid crisis is impacting people across the country and deserves attention to be able to curb the rise in opioid-related deaths. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate practice patterns in opioid infusion administration and dosing for patients with acute respiratory failure receiving invasive mechanical ventilation. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Patients from 21 hospitals in Kaiser Permanente Northern California and 96 hospitals in Philips electronic ICU Research Institute. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: We assessed whether patients received opioid infusion and the dose of said opioid infusion. RESULTS: We identified patients with a diagnosis of acute respiratory failure who were initiated on invasive mechanical ventilation. From each patient, we determined if opioid infusions were administered and, among those who received an opioid infusion, the median daily dose of fentanyl infusion. We used hierarchical regression models to quantify variation in opioid infusion use and the median daily dose of fentanyl equivalents across hospitals. We included 13,140 patients in the KPNC cohort and 52,033 patients in the eRI cohort. A total of 7,023 (53.4%) and 16,311 (31.1%) patients received an opioid infusion in the first 21 days of mechanical ventilation in the KPNC and eRI cohorts, respectively. After accounting for patient- and hospital-level fixed effects, the hospital that a patient was admitted to explained 7% (95% CI, 3-11%) and 39% (95% CI, 28-49%) of the variation in opioid infusion use in the KPNC and eRI cohorts, respectively. Among patients who received an opioid infusion, the median daily fentanyl equivalent dose was 692 µg (interquartile range [IQR], 129-1341 µg) in the KPNC cohort and 200 µg (IQR, 0-1050 µg) in the eRI cohort. Hospital explained 4% (95% CI, 1-7%) and 20% (95% CI, 15-26%) of the variation in median daily fentanyl equivalent dose in the KPNC and eRI cohorts, respectively. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In the context of efforts to limit healthcare-associated opioid exposure, our findings highlight the considerable opioid exposure that accompanies mechanical ventilation and suggest potential under and over-treatment with analgesia. Our results facilitate benchmarking of hospitals' analgesia practices against risk-adjusted averages and can be used to inform usual care control arms of analgesia and sedation clinical trials.

Practice Patterns for Acute Asthma Exacerbation in Adult Patients Admitted to US Intensive Care Units.

RATIONALE: Guidelines recommend systemic corticosteroids and inhaled beta-agonists for patients with severe asthma exacerbation admitted to intensive care units (ICUs). The benefits and utilization of adjunct treatments after guideline recommended first-line treatments have been initiated are unclear. METHODS: Using the Premier Inc. PINC AI multicenter database (2016-2022), we sought to explore the use of adjunct interventions (medications [e.g., magnesium, leukotriene inhibitors, terbutaline, heliox]; and procedures [e.g., invasive and non-invasive mechanical ventilation]) for adult patients admitted to United States (US) ICUs with acute asthma exacerbations. We used hierarchical generalized linear models to calculate risk-adjusted rates of adjunct interventions and quantified between-hospital variation in adjunct interventions using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC - higher values correspond to higher between hospital variation). We then used K-means clustering to identify groups of hospitals with similar risk-adjusted practice profiles of all adjunct treatments and examined associations between identified hospital clusters and patient outcomes. RESULTS: We identified 62,392 patients from 961 hospitals for inclusion. Adjunct interventions with the highest between hospital variation after risk-adjustment were heliox (ICC 91%), inhaled steroids (ICC 23%), invasive mechanical ventilation (ICC 21%), terbutaline (ICC 22%), paralytics (ICC 16%), and non-invasive ventilation (ICC 15%). K-means clustering identified two distinct hospital clusters: patients admitted to cluster 1 hospitals (399 hospitals) had higher risk-adjusted rates of non-invasive ventilation (51% vs 33%) compared to patients admitted to cluster 2 hospitals (234 hospitals) which had higher risk-adjusted rates of invasive mechanical ventilation (63% vs 30%). Cluster 2 was associated with fewer hospital free days (beta -0.75 days, CI -0.95, -0.55 days) and increased in-hospital mortality (aOR 1.28, CI 1.17, 1.40). CONCLUSIONS: The use of adjunct interventions for patients with severe asthma exacerbations vary widely across US hospitals; however, hospitals generally fall into two clusters differentiated primarily by the use of invasive or non-invasive mechanical ventilation. Our results help to inform usual care arms of future comparative effectiveness studies and efforts to standardize asthma practice.

Intravenous Opioid Administration During Mechanical Ventilation and Use After Hospital Discharge.

Importance: Guidelines recommend an analgesia-first strategy for sedation during mechanical ventilation, but associations between opioids provided during mechanical ventilation and posthospitalization opioid-related outcomes are unclear. Objective: To evaluate associations between an intravenous opioid dose received during mechanical ventilation and postdischarge opioid-related outcomes in medical (nonsurgical) patients. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study evaluated adults receiving mechanical ventilation lasting 24 hours or more for acute respiratory failure and surviving hospitalization. Participants from 21 Kaiser Permanente Northern California hospitals from January 1, 2012, to December 31, 2019, were included. Data were analyzed from October 1, 2020, to October 31, 2023. Exposures: Terciles of median daily intravenous fentanyl equivalents during mechanical ventilation. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the first filled opioid prescription in 1 year after discharge. Secondary outcomes included persistent opioid use and opioid-associated complications. Secondary analyses tested for interaction between opioid doses during mechanical ventilation, prior opioid use, and posthospitalization opioid use. Estimates were based on multivariable-adjusted time-to-event analyses, with death as a competing risk, and censored for hospice or palliative care referral, rehospitalization with receipt of opioid, or loss of Kaiser Permanente plan membership. Results: The study included 6746 patients across 21 hospitals (median age, 67 years [IQR, 57-76 years]; 53.0% male). Of the participants, 3114 (46.2%) filled an opioid prescription in the year prior to admission. The median daily fentanyl equivalent during mechanical ventilation was 200 µg (IQR, 40-1000 µg), with terciles of 0 to 67 µg, more than 67 to 700 µg, and more than 700 µg. Compared with patients who did not receive opioids during mechanical ventilation (n = 1013), a higher daily opioid dose was associated with opioid prescriptions in the year after discharge (n = 2942 outcomes; tercile 1: adjusted hazard ratio [AHR], 1.00 [95% CI, 0.85-1.17], tercile 2: AHR, 1.20 [95% CI, 1.03-1.40], and tercile 3: AHR, 1.25 [95% CI, 1.07-1.47]). Higher doses of opioids during mechanical ventilation were also associated with persistent opioid use after hospitalization (n = 1410 outcomes; tercile 3 vs no opioids: odds ratio, 1.44 [95% CI, 1.14-1.83]). No interaction was observed between opioid dose during mechanical ventilation, prior opioid use, and posthospitalization opioid use. Conclusions and Relevance: In this retrospective cohort study of patients receiving mechanical ventilation, opioids administered during mechanical ventilation were associated with opioid prescriptions following hospital discharge. Additional studies to evaluate risks and benefits of strategies using lower opioid doses are warranted.

In-Hospital vs 30-Day Sepsis Mortality at US Safety-Net and Non-Safety-Net Hospitals.

Importance: In-hospital mortality of patients with sepsis is frequently measured for benchmarking, both by researchers and policymakers. Prior studies have reported higher in-hospital mortality among patients with sepsis at safety-net hospitals compared with non-safety-net hospitals; however, in critically ill patients, in-hospital mortality rates are known to be associated with hospital discharge practices, which may differ between safety-net hospitals and non-safety-net hospitals. Objective: To assess how admission to safety-net hospitals is associated with 2 metrics of short-term mortality (in-hospital mortality and 30-day mortality) and discharge practices among patients with sepsis. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective, national cohort study of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries aged 66 years and older, admitted with sepsis to an intensive care unit from January 2011 to December 2019 based on information from the Medicare Provider Analysis and Review File. Data were analyzed from October 2022 to September 2023. Exposure: Admission to a safety-net hospital (hospitals with a Medicare disproportionate share index in the top quartile per US region). Main Outcomes and Measures: Coprimary outcomes: in-hospital mortality and 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes: (1) in-hospital do-not-resuscitate orders, (2) in-hospital palliative care delivery, (3) discharge to a postacute facility (skilled nursing facility, inpatient rehabilitation facility, or long-term acute care hospital), and (4) discharge to hospice. Results: Between 2011 and 2019, 2 551 743 patients with sepsis (mean [SD] age, 78.8 [8.2] years; 1 324 109 [51.9%] female; 262 496 [10.3%] Black, 2 137 493 [83.8%] White, and 151 754 [5.9%] other) were admitted to 666 safety-net hospitals and 1924 non-safety-net hospitals. Admission to safety-net hospitals was associated with higher in-hospital mortality (odds ratio [OR], 1.09; 95% CI, 1.06-1.13) but not 30-day mortality (OR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.99-1.04). Admission to safety-net hospitals was associated with lower do-not-resuscitate rates (OR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.81-0.91), palliative care delivery rates (OR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.60-0.73), and hospice discharge (OR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.78-0.87) but not with discharge to postacute facilities (OR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.95-1.01). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, among patients with sepsis, admission to safety-net hospitals was associated with higher in-hospital mortality but not with 30-day mortality. Differences in in-hospital mortality may partially be explained by greater use of hospice at non-safety-net hospitals, which shifts attribution of death from the index hospitalization to hospice. Future investigations and publicly reported quality measures should consider time-delimited rather than hospital-delimited measures of short-term mortality to avoid undue penalty to safety-net hospitals with similar short-term mortality.

Comparative Outcomes of Empagliflozin to Dapagliflozin in Patients With Heart Failure.

Importance: Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors have been shown to have benefits when used in patients with heart failure. The comparative outcomes of SGLT2 inhibitors relative to each other has not been well defined and may impact medication selection. Objective: To determine the comparative outcomes of empagliflozin and dapagliflozin on reducing the composite of all-cause mortality and hospitalizations in patients with heart failure. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter retrospective cohort study included patients with heart failure from August 18, 2021, and December 6, 2022, in the TriNetX Research Collaborative, a centralized database of deidentified electronic medical record data from a network of 81 health care organizations. Eligible patients had a diagnosis of heart failure, had never received an SGLT2 inhibitor previously, and were newly started on empagliflozin or dapagliflozin. Patients were followed up for 1 year. Exposure: Initiation of dapagliflozin or empagliflozin. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the time to the composite of all-cause mortality or hospitalization between study days 1 to 365. Kaplan-Meier analyses, hazard ratios (HRs), and 95% CIs were used to assess the primary outcome. Results: Among 744 914 eligible patients, 28 075 began empagliflozin (15 976 [56.9%]) or dapagliflozin (12 099 [43.1%]). After nearest-neighbor matching for demographics, diagnoses, and medication use, there were 11 077 patients in each group. Of patients who received empagliflozin, 9247 (57.9%) were male, 3130 (19.6%) were Black individuals, and 9576 (59.9%) were White individuals. Similarly, of those who received dapagliflozin, 7439 (61.5%) were male, 2445 (20.2%) were Black individuals, and 7131 (58.9%) were White individuals. Patients receiving empagliflozin were less likely to experience the composite of all-cause mortality or hospitalization compared with those initiated on dapagliflozin (3545 [32.2%] vs 3828 [34.8%] events; HR, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.86-0.94]) in the year following SGLT2 inhibitor initiation and less likely to be hospitalized (HR, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.86-0.94]). All-cause mortality did not differ between exposure groups (HR, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.82-1.00]). There was no difference in mean hemoglobin A1c or adverse events between groups. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, patients who initiated empagliflozin were less likely to experience the composite of all-cause mortality or hospitalization compared with patients who started dapagliflozin. Additional studies are needed to confirm these finding.

Complication Rates of Central Venous Catheters: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Importance: Central venous catheters (CVCs) are commonly used but are associated with complications. Quantifying complication rates is essential for guiding CVC utilization decisions. Objective: To summarize current rates of CVC-associated complications. Data Sources: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and CENTRAL databases were searched for observational studies and randomized clinical trials published between 2015 to 2023. Study Selection: This study included English-language observational studies and randomized clinical trials of adult patients that reported complication rates of short-term centrally inserted CVCs and data for 1 or more outcomes of interest. Studies that evaluated long-term intravascular devices, focused on dialysis catheters not typically used for medication administration, or studied catheters placed by radiologists were excluded. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Bayesian random-effects meta-analysis was applied to summarize event rates. Rates of placement complications (events/1000 catheters with 95% credible interval [CrI]) and use complications (events/1000 catheter-days with 95% CrI) were estimated. Main Outcomes and Measures: Ten prespecified complications associated with CVC placement (placement failure, arterial puncture, arterial cannulation, pneumothorax, bleeding events requiring action, nerve injury, arteriovenous fistula, cardiac tamponade, arrhythmia, and delay of ≥1 hour in vasopressor administration) and 5 prespecified complications associated with CVC use (malfunction, infection, deep vein thrombosis [DVT], thrombophlebitis, and venous stenosis) were assessed. The composite of 4 serious complications (arterial cannulation, pneumothorax, infection, or DVT) after CVC exposure for 3 days was also assessed. Results: Of 11 722 screened studies, 130 were included in the analyses. Seven of 15 prespecified complications were meta-analyzed. Placement failure occurred at 20.4 (95% CrI, 10.9-34.4) events per 1000 catheters placed. Other rates of CVC placement complications (per 1000 catheters) were arterial canulation (2.8; 95% CrI, 0.1-10), arterial puncture (16.2; 95% CrI, 11.5-22), and pneumothorax (4.4; 95% CrI, 2.7-6.5). Rates of CVC use complications (per 1000 catheter-days) were malfunction (5.5; 95% CrI, 0.6-38), infection (4.8; 95% CrI, 3.4-6.6), and DVT (2.7; 95% CrI, 1.0-6.2). It was estimated that 30.2 (95% CrI, 21.8-43.0) in 1000 patients with a CVC for 3 days would develop 1 or more serious complication (arterial cannulation, pneumothorax, infection, or DVT). Use of ultrasonography was associated with lower rates of arterial puncture (risk ratio [RR], 0.20; 95% CrI, 0.09-0.44; 13.5 events vs 68.8 events/1000 catheters) and pneumothorax (RR, 0.25; 95% CrI, 0.08-0.80; 2.4 events vs 9.9 events/1000 catheters). Conclusions and Relevance: Approximately 3% of CVC placements were associated with major complications. Use of ultrasonography guidance may reduce specific risks including arterial puncture and pneumothorax.

A novel measure to summarize blood transfusion practice during critical illness.

BACKGROUND: Large-scale observational studies have summarized transfusion practice using traditional measures of central tendency (e.g., the mean hemoglobin concentration at the time of transfusion). However, the mean hemoglobin concentration fails to identify specific hemoglobin concentration thresholds that drive practice. In the following brief report, we propose a novel measure of "practice discontinuity" that identifies specific practice-defining hemoglobin thresholds. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We used the PINC AI Database (2016-2022) to identify adult patients admitted to an intensive care unit with at least one hemoglobin concentration measurement. For each day that hemoglobin was measured, we identified whether the patient received a red blood cell transfusion using hospital charge codes. We defined the "practice discontinuity" measure as the hemoglobin concentration at which there was the largest increase in transfusion use going from a higher to an incrementally lower hemoglobin concentration. We also calculated the mean and median pretransfusion hemoglobin concentrations. RESULTS: We identified 1,298,367 patients and 4,905,839 patient-days for inclusion. RBC transfusion occurred in a total of 530,654 (10.8%) patient-days. The overall pre-transfusion mean and median hemoglobin concentrations were 8.4 and 8.0 g/dL, respectively. The practice discontinuity measure identified 7.0 g/dL as the hemoglobin concentration at which transfusion use increased the most, from 46.6% of patient-days at a concentration of 7.0 g/dL to 74.8% of patient-days at a concentration of 6.9 g/dL. DISCUSSION: We propose that future studies of red blood cell transfusion practice consider inclusion of the practice discontinuity measure to more fully summarize clinical practice.

Variation in Use of Medications for Opioid Use Disorder in Critically Ill Patients Across the United States.

OBJECTIVES: To describe practice patterns surrounding the use of medications to treat opioid use disorder (MOUD) in critically ill patients. DESIGN: Retrospective, multicenter, observational study using the Premier AI Healthcare Database. SETTING: The study was conducted in U.S. ICUs. PATIENTS: Adult (≥ 18 yr old) patients with a history of opioid use disorder (OUD) admitted to an ICU between 2016 and 2020. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Of 108,189 ICU patients (658 hospitals) with a history of OUD, 20,508 patients (19.0%) received MOUD. Of patients receiving MOUD, 13,745 (67.0%) received methadone, 2,950 (14.4%) received buprenorphine, and 4,227 (20.6%) received buprenorphine/naloxone. MOUD use occurred in 37.9% of patients who received invasive mechanical ventilation. The median day of MOUD initiation was hospital day 2 (interquartile range [IQR] 1-3) and the median duration of MOUD use was 4 days (IQR 2-8). MOUD use per hospital was highly variable (median 16.0%; IQR 10-24; range, 0-70.0%); admitting hospital explained 8.9% of variation in MOUD use. A primary admitting diagnosis of unintentional poisoning (aOR 0.41; 95% CI, 0.38-0.45), presence of an additional substance use disorder (aOR 0.66; 95% CI, 0.64-0.68), and factors indicating greater severity of illness were associated with reduced odds of receiving MOUD in the ICU. CONCLUSIONS: In a large multicenter, retrospective study, there was large variation in the use of MOUD among ICU patients with a history of OUD. These results inform future studies seeking to optimize the approach to MOUD use during critical illness.

Comparative Effectiveness of Mepolizumab, Benralizumab, and Dupilumab among Patients with Difficult-to-Control Asthma: A Multicenter Retrospective Propensity-matched Analysis.

Rationale: The comparative effectiveness of biologic agents used as add-on therapy in the management of difficult-to-control asthma is unclear. Objective: To compare the effectiveness of dupilumab, mepolizumab, and benralizumab among patients with difficult-to-control asthma. Methods: Retrospective multicenter cohort study of adult patients with difficult-to-control asthma starting treatment with dupilumab, mepolizumab, or benralizumab as documented in a multicenter electronic health record and claims-based database between October 19, 2018, and September 30, 2022. Propensity-score matching was used to minimize bias from nonrandomized treatment assignment; a prespecified α-level was set at 0.017 to account for three primary comparisons. The exposure of interest was the new initiation of dupilumab, benralizumab, or mepolizumab treatment. The primary outcome was the rate of asthma exacerbations in the 1 year after initiation of biologic therapy modeled using a negative binomial approach. Results: Among 893,668 patients with asthma who were prescribed an inhaled corticosteroid and were ⩾12 years old (65% female; mean age, 49 yr), 3,943 started dupilumab, 1,902 started benralizumab, and 2,012 started mepolizumab, all without an alternative indication for biologic therapy. After matching, there were 1,805 patients in each group for comparisons between dupilumab and benralizumab, 1,865 for comparisons between dupilumab and mepolizumab, and 1,721 for comparisons between mepolizumab and benralizumab. For all pairwise comparisons, covariates were well balanced after matching (all standardized mean differences <0.1). Patients who initiated dupilumab had a significantly lower rate of asthma exacerbations (1.07 per year) compared with benralizumab (1.47 per year), with a rate ratio (RR) of 0.73 (95% confidence interval, 0.63-0.85), and also had a significantly lower rate of asthma exacerbations compared with mepolizumab (1.04 per year vs. 1.45 per year), with an RR of 0.72 (0.62-0.84). There was no statistically significant difference in the rate of asthma exacerbations between mepolizumab (1.40 per year) and benralizumab (1.41 per year), with an RR of 1.00 (0.85-1.17). Conclusions: In patients with difficult-to-control asthma who had newly initiated biologic therapy, dupilumab was associated with a decreased rate of asthma exacerbations in the 1 year after initiation compared with mepolizumab or benralizumab.

Incidence and prognostic significance of newly-diagnosed atrial fibrillation among older U.S. veterans hospitalized with COVID-19.

Most prior studies on the prognostic significance of newly-diagnosed atrial fibrillation (AF) in COVID-19 did not differentiate newly-diagnosed AF from pre-existing AF. To determine the association between newly-diagnosed AF and in-hospital and 30-day mortality among regular users of Veterans Health Administration using data linked to Medicare. We identified Veterans aged ≥ 65 years who were hospitalized for ≥ 24 h with COVID-19 from 06/01/2020 to 1/31/2022 and had ≥ 2 primary care visits within 24 months prior to the index hospitalization. We performed multivariable logistic regression analyses to estimate adjusted risks, risk differences (RD), and odds ratios (OR) for the association between newly-diagnosed AF and the mortality outcomes adjusting for patient demographics, baseline comorbidities, and presence of acute organ dysfunction on admission. Of 23,299 patients in the study cohort, 5.3% had newly-diagnosed AF, and 29.2% had pre-existing AF. In newly-diagnosed AF adjusted in-hospital and 30-day mortality were 16.5% and 22.7%, respectively. Newly-diagnosed AF was associated with increased mortality compared to pre-existing AF (in-hospital: OR 2.02, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.72-2.37; RD 7.58%, 95% CI 5.54-9.62) (30-day: OR 1.86; 95% CI 1.60-2.16; RD 9.04%, 95% CI 6.61-11.5) or no AF (in-hospital: OR 2.24, 95% CI 1.93-2.60; RD 8.40%, 95% CI 6.44-10.4) (30-day: 2.07, 95% CI 1.80-2.37; RD 10.2%, 95% CI 7.89-12.6). There was a smaller association between pre-existing AF and the mortality outcomes. Newly-diagnosed AF is an important prognostic marker for patients hospitalized with COVID-19. Whether prevention or treatment of AF improves clinical outcomes in these patients remains unknown.

Effectiveness of Fludrocortisone Plus Hydrocortisone versus Hydrocortisone Alone in Septic Shock: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Rationale: The use of hydrocortisone in adult patients with septic shock is controversial, and the effectiveness of adding fludrocortisone to hydrocortisone remains uncertain. Objectives: To assess the comparative effectiveness and safety of fludrocortisone plus hydrocortisone, hydrocortisone alone, and placebo or usual care in adults with septic shock. Methods: A systematic review and a Bayesian network meta-analysis of peer-reviewed randomized trials were conducted. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality at last follow-up. Treatment effects are presented as relative risks (RRs) with 95% credible intervals (CrIs). Placebo or usual care was the reference treatment. Measurements and Main Results: Among 7,553 references, we included 17 trials (7,688 patients). All-cause mortality at last follow-up was lowest with fludrocortisone plus hydrocortisone (RR, 0.85; 95% CrI, 0.72-0.99; 98.3% probability of superiority, moderate-certainty evidence), followed by hydrocortisone alone (RR, 0.97; 95% CrI, 0.87-1.07; 73.1% probability of superiority, low-certainty evidence). The comparison of fludrocortisone plus hydrocortisone versus hydrocortisone alone was based primarily on indirect evidence (only two trials with direct evidence). Fludrocortisone plus hydrocortisone was associated with a 12% lower risk of all-cause mortality compared with hydrocortisone alone (RR, 0.88; 95% CrI, 0.74-1.03; 94.2% probability of superiority, moderate-certainty evidence). Conclusions: In adult patients with septic shock, fludrocortisone plus hydrocortisone was associated with lower risk of all-cause mortality at last follow-up than placebo and hydrocortisone alone. The scarcity of head-to-head trials comparing fludrocortisone plus hydrocortisone versus hydrocortisone alone led our network meta-analysis to rely primarily on indirect evidence for this comparison. Although we undertook several sensitivity analyses and assessments, these findings should be considered while also acknowledging the heterogeneity of included trials.

Practice Patterns and Outcomes of Potassium Repletion Thresholds during Critical Illness.

Rationale: Potassium repletion is common in critically ill patients. However, practice patterns and outcomes related to different intensive care unit (ICU) potassium repletion strategies are unclear. Objectives: 1) Describe potassium repletion practices in critically ill adults; 2) compare the effectiveness of potassium repletion strategies; and 3) compare effectiveness and safety of specific potassium repletion thresholds on patient outcomes. Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of the PINC AI Healthcare Database (2016-2022), including all critically ill adults admitted to an ICU on Hospital Day 1 and with a serum potassium concentration measured on Hospital Day 2. We determined the frequency of potassium repletion (any formulation) at each measured serum potassium concentration in each ICU, then classified ICUs as having threshold-based (a large increase in potassium repletion rates at a specific serum potassium concentration) or probabilistic (linear relationship between serum concentration and the repletion probability) patterns of repletion. Between patients in threshold-based and probabilistic repletion ICUs, we compared outcomes (primary outcome: potassium repletion frequency). We reported unadjusted percentages per exposure group and the adjusted odds ratios (from hierarchical regression models) for each outcome. Among patients in threshold-based ICUs with the most common repletion thresholds (3.5 mEq/L and 4.0 mEq/L), we conducted regression discontinuity analyses to examine the effectiveness of potassium repletion at each potassium threshold. Results: We included 190,490 patients in 88 ICUs; 35.0% received at least one dose of potassium on the same calendar day. Rates of potassium repletion were similar between 22 threshold-based strategy ICUs (33.5%) and 22 probabilistic strategy ICUs (36.4%). There was no difference in the adjusted risk of potassium repletion between patients admitted to threshold-based strategy ICUs versus probabilistic strategy ICUs (adjusted odds ratio, 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.76-1.57). In regression discontinuity analysis, crossing the 3.5 mEq/L threshold from high to low potassium levels resulted in a 39.1% (95% CI, 23.7-42.4) absolute increase in potassium repletion but no change in other outcomes. Similarly, crossing the 4.0 mEq/L threshold resulted in a 36.4% (95% CI, 22.4-42.2) absolute increase in potassium repletion but no change in other outcomes. Conclusions: Potassium repletion is common in critically ill patients and occurs over a narrow range of "normal" potassium levels (3.5-4.0 mEq/L); use of a threshold-based repletion strategy to guide potassium repletion in ICU patients is not associated with clinically meaningful differences in outcomes.